最近更新：2025-03-07
2025-cv-02112
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 03/14/2025 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff P4S, LLC Unredacted Complaint |
| 03/14/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff P4S, LLC for leave to file documents under seal Renewed Motion |
| 03/14/2025 | EXHIBIT by Plaintiff P4S, LLC 1 regarding amended complaint[9] 附件： 1:Ex.2 2:Ex.3 |
| 03/14/2025 | AMENDED complaint by P4S, LLC against John Doe and terminating The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified in Schedule A |
| 03/04/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff P4S, LLC by Zareefa Burki Flener |
| 03/04/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff P4S, LLC by Ying Chen |
| 02/28/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable April M. Perry: Plaintiff's Motion to Seal [4] is granted in part. The plaintiff's identity shall not be sealed. The Court raises concern that the plaintiff is attempting to proceed under the pseudonym "P4S." The Seventh Circuit heavily disfavors anonymous, pseudonymous, or "no-name" litigation and requires the plaintiff to demonstrate "exceptional circumstances" that justify a refusal to self-identify. Doe v. Village of Deerfield, 819 F.3d 372, 37677 (7th Cir. 2016). "[B]rand owners who seek relief against alleged counterfeiters may be frustrated by the stringent requirements for pseudonymous litigation. But in the absence of a change in binding Seventh Circuit caselaw, changes to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, or the creation of an alternative legislative remedy, the current legal framework does not permit pseudonymity without a demonstration of circumstances more exceptional than those presented" in a typical "Schedule A" online counterfeiting case. XYZ Corp. v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Sched. A, No. 21- CV-06471, 2022 WL 180151 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 20, 2022); see also XYZ Corporation v. Partnership and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", 2020 WL 6681360 (N.D. Ill., 2020) (noting that in a case with an anonymous plaintiff suing a sealed schedule A, "[t]he public has no earthly idea who is suing whom," and striking the complaint because the plaintiff attempted to proceed anonymously without "request[ing] leave of Court, let alone establish[ing] that 'exceptional circumstances' justify shielding its identity."). The complaint identifies circumstances that are common to all "Schedule A" cases, meaning that the circumstances are, by definition, not exceptional. Accordingly, the plaintiff is directed to file an amended, non-anonymous complaint and to change the pseudonym used on the case caption on CM/ECF to the plaintiff's true identity by 3/7/2025. It appearing that the case filed is a "Schedule A" case, the Plaintiff is also directed to the Court's standing order on its website directing the filing of the Court's Schedule A Template within 14 days. Upon review of the complaint, the Court sua sponte raises the propriety under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2) of joining 166 defendants to this action. See, e.g, Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182 (N.D. Ill. 2020). Plaintiff is reminded that "[c]ourts in this district generally agree that alleging that multiple defendants have infringed on the same copyright in the same way does not create the substantial evidentiary overlap required to find a similar transaction or occurrence." See Roadget Bus. Pte. Ltd. v. Individuals, Corps, Ltd. Liab. Companies, Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 23-cv-17036, 2024 WL 1858592, at *6 (N.D. Ill. Apr. 29, 2024) (collecting cases). Plaintiff should also reference this Court's opinion in Zaful v. Schedule A Defs., 24-cv-11111, Doc. 12 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 10, 2025), where the Court expressed its views on joinder in such cases. By 3/14/2025, the plaintiff must file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder in light of the principles described above. In the alternative, plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint by 3/14/2025 with a smaller subset of defendants along with a memorandum explaining why each defendant is properly joined to all of the others. Mailed notice. (jcc,) |
| 02/28/2025 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff P4S, LLC Unredacted Complaint |
| 02/28/2025 | 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. |
| 02/28/2025 | CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable April M. Perry. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Daniel P. McLaughlin. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3). |
| 02/28/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff P4S, LLC for leave to file Documents Under Seal |
| 02/28/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff P4S, LLC by James Edward Judge |
| 02/28/2025 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 02/28/2025 | COMPLAINT filed by P4S, LLC; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23146751. 附件： 1:Ex.1 2:Schedule A 3:Ex.2 4:Ex.3 |
