2025-cv-10833 +组团 近期案件➥ 订阅
原告律所：David
品牌：Stephanie Forbes 版权
小提示：专注TRO和解/应诉，需要起诉文件/被告名单/其他帮助可联系我们，微信右上角“···”可全文翻译/分享找队友/订阅可自动推送此案最新进展
微信扫码联系我们
| # | Date | Description |
| 13 |
10/01/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The Court has reviewed the plaintiff's memorandum on joinder [Dkt. [11]] and determines, within its discretion, that it has failed to satisfy its burden to show that joinder of more than 40 defendants is proper in this matter under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2). See Este Lauder Cosms. Ltd. v. The Partnerships, 334 F.R.D. 182, 185 (N.D. Ill. 2020) (noting that "[plaintiff] bears the burden of demonstrating that joinder is proper"). In evaluating the appropriateness of joinder, the court assesses whether a logical relationship exists between defendants through actual evidentiary overlap, not coincidence. Este Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 185. Plaintiff argues that joinder is proper because all Defendants appear to operate in the same geographic region, share a common set of wholesale distributors and/or counterfeit sources, share common platforms for their infringing listings/sales, share financial institutions, and employsimilar methods for obscuring the source of their goods and their identities. The court is not persuaded that any one defendant's infringement is linked to the next defendant's infringement sufficient to show they are part of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences as required by Rule 20. Even if the court were mistaken in its joinder analysis, it exercises its discretion to not permit joinder in this case. See Dorsey v. Varga, 55 F.4th 1094, 110204 (7th Cir. 2022). Joining this many defendants in one case simply will not promote judicial economy. See Este Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 189 ("[P]resenting dozens or hundreds of defendants in one lawsuit actually undermines judicial economy, because this Court must evaluate the evidence submitted in support of liability and, eventually, damages. That is especially true in the ex parte setting of a temporary restraining order, as well as for default-judgment motions."); Art Ask Agency, 2021 WL 5493226, at *3 (rejecting joinder of 216 defendants, noting that "joinder in this case may yield significant financial benefits to [the plaintiff] at the judiciary's expense.") Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint listing one Defendant by no later than October 8, 2025. Any motion for electronic service of process order should also be submitted by October 8, 2025. Mailed notice. 翻译 |
| 12 |
09/30/2025
|
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Stephanie Forbes 翻译 |
| 11 |
09/17/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The motion for an extension of time [9] is granted. Any memorandum as to joinder is now due by September 30, 2025. Mailed notice. 翻译 |
| 10 |
09/16/2025
|
MOTION by Plaintiff Stephanie Forbes for extension of time to file Memorandum in Support of Joinder 翻译 |
| 9 |
09/09/2025
|
MAILED copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC 翻译 |
| 8 |
09/10/2025
|
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Lindsay C. Jenkins: The Court grants the motion to seal [6], but upon review of the complaint, the Court sua sponte raises the propriety of joining more than 45 defendants in a single action. By September 16, 2025, plaintiff must file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder. In the alternative, plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint by September 16, 2025 with a smaller subset of defendants along with a memorandum explaining why that smaller subset of defendants is properly joined. No motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order should be filed in this matter without counsel first consulting the opinion issued in Wham-O Holding v. The Partnerships, 24 CV 12523, Dkt. 39 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 20, 2025) (Alexakis, J.). Mailed notice. 翻译 |
| 7 |
09/09/2025
|
CLERK'S NOTICE: Pursuant to Local Rule 73.1(b), a United States Magistrate Judge of this court is available to conduct all proceedings in this civil action. If all parties consent to have the currently assigned United States Magistrate Judge conduct all proceedings in this case, including trial, the entry of final judgment, and all post-trial proceedings, all parties must sign their names on the attached Consent To form. This consent form is eligible for filing only if executed by all parties. The parties can also express their consent to jurisdiction by a magistrate judge in any joint filing, including the Joint Initial Status Report or proposed Case Management Order. 翻译 |
| 6 |
09/09/2025
|
MOTION by Plaintiff Stephanie Forbes to seal document sealed document[2] 翻译 |
| 5 |
09/09/2025
|
SEALED DOCUMENT of David Lee Gulbransen, Jr as U.S. Attorney for Plaintiff Stephanie Forbes 翻译 |
| 4 |
09/09/2025
|
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Stephanie Forbes by David Lee Gulbransen, Jr 翻译 |
| 3 |
09/09/2025
|
CIVIL Cover Sheet 翻译 |
| 2 |
09/09/2025
|
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Stephanie Forbes Schedule A to Complaint 翻译 |
| 1 |
09/09/2025
|
COMPLAINT filed by Stephanie Forbes; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-24035426. 翻译 |