2025-cv-09003 AI分析
08/11/2025
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: This case is dismissed for misjoinder. The dismissal is without prejudice. The plaintiff argues that all of defendants' alleged infringing conduct arises out of the same transaction or occurrence because the defendants use the same platform and sales mechanism, sell identical products, misuse the plaintiff's mark, and identify the same manufacturer of their products. The reasoning set forth in Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. v. The Partnerships, 24 CV 9401, Dkt. 27 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2024) covers the first three issues. As for the defendants listing the same manufacturer on their respective websites, that only suggests a common supplier. Contrary to the plaintiff's suggestion, it does not show coordinated distribution. More importantly, it does not trace back to a common transaction or occurrence. At best, it alleges a series of parallel infringements by separate defendants. The Court notes that the plaintiff mentions that the wallets are all identical in design, (R. 8 at 3), but it is unclear whether the plaintiff has ordered each defendants' product. Thus, when the plaintiff argues that the "infringing wallets are identical in design," the Court understands that to mean that the photographs of the accused products show wallets that are identical in design. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. 翻译
08/06/2025
MEMORANDUM by Yu Wang in support to Joinder 翻译
附件：
1:Exhibit 9 Schedule B part 9
2:(Exhibit 10 Schedule B part 10)
3:Exhibit 8 Schedule B part 8
4:Exhibit 7 Schedule B part 7
5:Exhibit 6 Schedule B part 6
6:Exhibit 5 Schedule B part 5
7:Exhibit 4 Schedule B part 4
8:Exhibit 3 Schedule B part 3
9:Exhibit 2 Schedule B part 2
10:Exhibit 1 Schedule B part 1
08/01/2025
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: The plaintiff has filed a complaint alleging infringement by 73 defendants. This case follows a pattern common to "Schedule A" cases where plaintiffs allege that defendants employ similar methods and "work in active concert" to infringe plaintiffs' intellectual property. But experience has shown that not all defendants named in a Schedule A case work together. More importantly, experience has shown that joinder under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20 is rarely appropriate in Schedule A cases. See, e.g., Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. v. The Partnerships, 24 CV 9401, Dkt. 27 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2024). Accordingly, the Court raises the propriety of joinder and requires the plaintiff to file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder on or before August 15, 2025. Alternatively, by the same date, the plaintiff may file an amended complaint naming one or more defendants; however, if the plaintiff names multiple defendants, the plaintiff must show that joinder of those defendants is proper. All pending motions are hereby stayed pending resolution of the joinder issue. Further, should the plaintiff (1) file an amended complaint naming fewer defendants in this case, (2) file a separate complaint naming one or more of the remaining defendants originally named in this case, and (3) assert the same claims against those defendants, the Court reminds the plaintiff of Local Rule 40.3(b)(2), which requires the plaintiff to indicate the number of the this case and the name of the judge to whom it was assigned. Mailed notice 翻译
07/31/2025
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
07/31/2025
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Beth W. Jantz. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). 翻译
07/31/2025
COMPLAINT filed by Yu Wang; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23820483. 翻译
附件：
1:(Exhibit 3)
2:Exhibit 2
3:Exhibit 1
案件最新进展，来源于美国联邦法院，下载文件请联系 18523047090 微信同号
被告名单文件：部分原告会选择隐匿发案，或者对提交的文件进行密封处理，因此包括被告信息在内的相关文件不会在前期公开（一般PI阶段左右才会公开）。
诉状：诉状通常包括原被告的基本信息、侵权行为、侵权类型，以及诉讼请求，如确认侵权、下架侵权产品、请求赔偿等，这个文件起诉就可以下载
案件每天自动更新，未及时更新的可点击 案件名称旁边 更新 按钮
