Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified On Schedule A, The
ORDER: For the reasons set forth in the accompanying Order, the Court dismisses Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice for misjoinder 16. Plaintiff has until 7/24/2025 to file an amended complaint naming one defendant or a group of properly joined defendants. If the latter, Plaintiff must also file a memorandum explaining why joinder of those defendants is proper. The Court grants Plaintiff's motions to seal 6 8 and denies Plaintiff's motions for temporary restraining orders 3 5 as moot. Signed by the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama on 7/10/2025. Mailed notice.
16
2025/07/08
MOTION by Plaintiff Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD for joinder
15
2025/07/07
AMENDED complaint by Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD against Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified On Schedule A, The
14
2025/06/18
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On review of the complaint and the memorandum in support of Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order, the Court raises the propriety of joinder of the 214 Defendants. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2) governs permissive joinder of defendants. It permits defendants to be joined in a single action if two conditions are met: (1) "any right to relief is asserted against them jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions"; and (2) "any question of law or fact common to all defendants will arise in the action." Fed. R. Civ. P 20(a)(2); see UWM Student Ass'n v. Lovell, 888 F.3d 854, 863 (7th Cir. 2018). As other courts within this District have held, "it is appropriate for federal courts to raise improper joinder on their own, especially when the sheer number of defendants waves a joinder red flag and ups the chances that the plaintiff should be paying separate filing fees for separate cases. The need for sua sponte evaluation also intensifies when it would take enormous time and effort to check the evidencesuch as screenshots of dozens and dozens of defendants' online storesamassed into a single case absent actual connections between the defendants." Estee Lauder Cosms. Ltd. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182, 186 (N.D. Ill. 2020) (citing George v. Smith, 507 F.3d 605, 607 (7th Cir. 2007)); see also, e.g., Andrew Blair Bailie v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A," 24-cv-02150 Dkt. 28 (Apr. 24, 2024).). Here, Plaintiff's allegations purporting to establish joinder are merely conclusory. For example, Plaintiff alleges that "Defendants concurrently employ and benefit from similar advertising and marketing strategies." R. 2, para. 19. Similar to another court in this District, this Court's "experience has shown that, while some individual defendants may operate several online stores, and while some individual defendants may coordinate with other defendants before or after the filing of the infringement action, rarely, if ever, have all defendants named in a Schedule A case worked together." Toyota Motor Sales, U.S.A., Inc. v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, 24-cv-09401 Dkt. 23 (Oct. 18, 2024). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(3) requires that, "factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery." Accordingly, the Court directs Plaintiff to file, on or before 7/7/25, a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder, including, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)((3), showing cause why the allegation that "defendants are working in active concert" does not violate Rule 11(b)(3). Instead of the supplemental memorandum, by the same deadline, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint with (a) one defendant or (b) a subset of the defendants along with a memorandum explaining why joinder of those defendants is proper. Mailed notice.
13
2025/06/17
STATUS Report by Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD
12
2025/04/14
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Attorney Qi Men's motion to withdraw 10 as attorney for Defendant Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD. is granted. Mailed notice.
11
2025/04/10
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD by Alexander Warden
10
2025/04/10
MOTION by Attorney Qi Men to withdraw as attorney for Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD. No party information provided
9
2025/04/03
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On or before 6/17/2025, the parties shall file a joint initial status report. A template for the Joint Initial Status Report, setting forth the information required, may be found at http://www.ilnd.uscourts.gov/Judges.aspx by clicking on Judge Valderrama's name and then again on the link entitled 'Joint Initial Status Report. Plaintiff must serve this Minute Entry on all other parties. If the defendant(s) has not been served with process by that date, plaintiff's counsel is instructed to file an individual status report indicating the status of service of process by the same deadline. The parties are further ordered to review all of Judge Valderrama's standing orders and the information available on his webpage. Any nongovernmental corporate party that qualifies under the Rules is reminded of the requirement to file a disclosure statement under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 7.1/N.D. Ill. Local Rule 3.2. Mailed notice.
8
2025/03/29
MOTION by Plaintiff Pranash (Tianjin) Technology Development Co., LTD to seal document memorandum in support of motion 4, MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order 3, MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD to seal document memorandum in support of motion 4, MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order 3, am 6, amended complaint, 2, MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order Motion For Alternative Service 5
2025/03/28
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.
2025/03/28
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Keri L. Holleb Hotaling. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 1).
7
2025/03/27
Civil Cover Sheet by PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD
6
2025/03/27
MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD to seal document memorandum in support of motion 4, MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order 3, amended complaint, 2, MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order Motion For Alternative Service 5
5
2025/03/27
MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order Motion For Alternative Service
4
2025/03/27
MEMORANDUM by PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD in support of motion for temporary restraining order 3
3
2025/03/27
MOTION by Plaintiff PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD for temporary restraining order
2
2025/03/27
Verified Complaint AMENDED complaint by PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD against THE INDIVIDUALS, CORPORATIONS, LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANIES, PARTNERSHIPS, and UNINCORPORATED ASSOCIATES IDENTIFIED ON SCHEDULE A
1
2025/03/27
COMPLAINT filed by PRANASH (TIANJIN) TECHNOLOGY DEVELOPMENT CO., LTD; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23270647.