MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons stated in the motion, the Court grants the motion to withdraw as counsel [20]. Attorney Wei Wang is withdrawn as counsel for Defendant Chengdu Shiqiaoshang Technology Co., Ltd. Mailed notice.
20
2025/07/01
MOTION by Attorney Wei Wang to withdraw as attorney for Chengdu Shiqiaoshang Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a ShiQiaoShang.
19
2025/07/01
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendant Chengdu Shiqiaoshang Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a ShiQiaoShang by Wei Wang
18
2025/06/30
SUPPLEMENT to set deadlines, 17 Plaintiff's Supplemental Memorandum in Support of Propriety of Joinder
17
2025/06/24
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 12 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. 1, para. 24. 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
2025/05/09
ATTORNEY Appearance for Defendants GSJ-US, weiying-US, MEIXIANCI, Wonderful LIFE, SELFILA Technology by Lance Y. Liu
2025/05/05
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.
2025/05/05
CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 1).
12
2025/05/05
EMAILED Patent report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA
11
2025/05/04
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC by Sameeul Haque
10
2025/05/04
ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC by Nicholas S. Lee
9
2025/05/04
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC Notification of Affiliates
8
2025/05/04
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC Notice of Claims
7
2025/05/04
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC Sealed Exhibit 2 to the Complaint
6
2025/05/04
SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC Sealed Complaint and Exhibits
5
2025/05/04
MOTION by Plaintiff Pathway IP LLC for leave to file Certain Documents Under Seal
4
2025/05/04
Notice of Affiliates Pursuant to LR 3.2 by Pathway IP LLC (Redacted)
3
2025/05/04
Notice of Claims by Pathway IP LLC (Redacted)
2
2025/05/04
CIVIL Cover Sheet
1
2025/05/02
COMPLAINT (Redacted) filed by Pathway IP LLC; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23431928.