最近更新：2025-01-24
2024-cv-11007
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 12/27/2024 | ANNUAL REMINDER: Pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 (Notification of Affiliates), any nongovernmental party, other than an individual or sole proprietorship, must file a statement identifying all its affiliates known to the party after diligent review or, if the party has identified no affiliates, then a statement reflecting that fact must be filed. An affiliate is defined as follows: any entity or individual owning, directly or indirectly (through ownership of one or more other entities), 5% or more of a party. The statement is to be electronically filed as a PDF in conjunction with entering the affiliates in CM/ECF as prompted. As a reminder to counsel, parties must supplement their statements of affiliates within thirty (30) days of any change in the information previously reported. This minute order is being issued to all counsel of record to remind counsel of their obligation to provide updated information as to additional affiliates if such updating is necessary. If counsel has any questions regarding this process, this LINK will provide additional information. Signed by the Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 12/27/2024: Mailed notice. |
| 11/26/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Amended Schedule A |
| 11/26/2024 | AMENDED complaint by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. against The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Amended Schedule A Hereto 附件： 1:(Exhibit 1) |
| 11/26/2024 | EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE ORDER: GENERAL ORDER 24-0032: IT APPEARING THAT, the civil cases on the attached list have been selected for reassignment to form the initial calendar of the Honorable April M. Perry; therefore IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the attached list of 290 cases be reassigned to the Honorable April M. Perry; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all parties affected by this Order must review the Honorable April M. Perry's webpage on the Court's website for the purpose of reviewing instructions regarding scheduling and case management procedures; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that any civil case that has been reassigned pursuant to this Order will not be randomly reassigned to create the initial calendar of a new district judge for twelve months from the date of this Order; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to add the Honorable April M. Perry to the Court's civil case assignment system during the next business day, so that she shall receive a full share of such cases; and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of Court is directed to add the Honorable April M. Perry to the Court's criminal case assignment system ninety (90) days so that Judge Perry shall thereafter receive a full share of such cases. Case reassigned to the Honorable April M. Perry for all further proceedings. Honorable John Robert Blakey no longer assigned to the case. Signed by Honorable Virginia M. Kendall on 11/26/2024. |
| 11/04/2024 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: In this lawsuit, Plaintiff seeks to sue 149 separate defendants for trademark and trade dress infringement. See 1, 8. Joinder of multiple defendants in a single trademark infringement action remains appropriate only if the claims against the defendants are asserted "with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences," and a common question of law or fact exists as to all defendants. Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2)(A)-(B). On this score, Plaintiff alleges that, although Defendants "operate under multiple fictitious names, there are numerous similarities among the Defendant Internet Stores. For example, some of the Defendant websites have virtually identical layouts, even though different aliases were used to register the respective online marketplace accounts. In addition, the counterfeit Products for sale in the Defendant Internet Stores bear similarities and indicia of being related to one another, suggesting that the counterfeit Products were manufactured by and come from a common source and that, upon information and belief, Defendants are interrelated. The Defendant Internet Stores also include other notable common features, including use of the same online marketplace account registration patterns, unique shopping cart platforms, accepted payment methods, check-out methods, meta data, illegitimate SEO tactics, HTML user-defined variables, domain redirection, lack of contact information, identically or similarly priced items and volume sales discounts, similar hosting services, similar name servers, and the use of the same text and images. 1 35. While these allegations may suffice to support joinder, they are undermined significantly by the screenshot evidence submitted along with Plaintiff's pleadings. A cursory review of that evidence shows, for example, that, although some defendant stores do appear to use some of the same stock photos, others do not, showing instead a variety of images and undermining Plaintiff's relatedness claim. See, e.g. 20 at 1, 11, 15, 23. Additionally, some of the product images appear inconsistent with the claimed use of Plaintiff's infringement claims. See, e.g., 16 at 8 (no apparent use of Plaintiff's mark); 17 at 32 (same); 18 at 1 (same); 15 at 121 (no apparent infringement of Plaintiff's claimed trade dress); 18 at 28, 65 (same); 19 at 11, 44 (same); 20 at 15 (same). As a result, the Court dismisses without prejudice Plaintiff's complaint 1 and denies as moot Plaintiff's motions for leave to seal 7 and file excess pages 12 and motion for TRO 13. The 11/6/24 Notice of Motion date is stricken as to all motions. If Plaintiff can, consistent with its obligations under Rule 11, amend its complaint to allege facts to support the joinder of the identified defendants in this single action, it may do so by 11/26/24. If Plaintiff fails to comply, the Court will dismiss this case. If Plaintiff elects to amend its complaint, it should also bolster its allegations relating to personal jurisdiction. Plaintiff alleges that personal jurisdiction exists as to each Defendant because "each Defendant conducts significant business in Illinois and in this Judicial District, and the acts and events giving rise to this lawsuit of which each Defendant stands accused were undertaken in Illinois and in this Judicial District. In addition, each Defendant has offered to sell and ship infringing products into this Judicial District." 1 12. But the former is a legal conclusion (unsupported by the submitted screenshot evidence), and the latter remains insufficient to confer personal jurisdiction. See, e.g., Am. Bridal & Prom Indus. Ass'n, Inc. v. The Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, 192 F. Supp. 3d 924, 93435 (N.D. Ill. 2016) (simply alleging the existence of purported counterfeiting via an interactive website is not enough, by itself, to confer personal jurisdiction); Advanced Tactical Ordnance Sys., LLC v. Real Action Paintball, Inc., 751 F.3d 796, 803 (7th Cir. 2014) ("Having an interactive website. should not open a defendant up to personal jurisdiction in every spot on the planet where that interactive website is accessible."); Rubik's Brand, Ltd. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 20-CV-5338, 2021 WL 825668, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 4, 2021) (screenshot evidence showing that an order could be placed by an Illinoisan, "amounts to nothing more than maintaining an interactive website that is accessible in Illinois," and "that alone cannot confer personal jurisdiction."). Mailed notice |
| 10/28/2024 | NOTICE of Motion by Michael A. Hierl for presentment of motion for temporary restraining order, 13, motion for leave to file excess pages 12, motion to seal document 7 before Honorable John Robert Blakey on 11/6/2024 at 11:00 AM. |
| 10/28/2024 | Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. |
| 10/28/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 6 of Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 5 of Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 4 of Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 3 of Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 2 of Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 1 of Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | MEMORANDUM by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. in support of motion for temporary restraining order, 13 附件： 1:(Exhibit Hierl Exhibit 3) 2:Exhibit Hierl Exhibit 2 3:Exhibit Hierl Exhibit 1 4:Declaration Hierl Declaration 5:Exhibit 1 6:Declaration Takeyama Declaration |
| 10/28/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. for temporary restraining order Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion for Entry of a Temporary Restraining Order, Including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, Expedited Discovery, and Service of Process by Email and/or Electronic Publication |
| 10/28/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. for leave to file excess pages Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Page Limitation |
| 10/28/2024 | MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials |
| 10/28/2024 | MAILED trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |
| 10/25/2024 | 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. |
| 10/25/2024 | CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Direct assignment. (Civil Category Civil Direct Assignment). |
| 10/25/2024 | NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. |
| 10/25/2024 | SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Sealed Schedule A |
| 10/25/2024 | MOTION by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. to seal document Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal |
| 10/25/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by John Wilson |
| 10/25/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by Robert Payton Mcmurray |
| 10/25/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by William Benjamin Kalbac |
| 10/25/2024 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by Michael A. Hierl |
| 10/25/2024 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 10/25/2024 | COMPLAINT filed by Casio Computer Co., Ltd.; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22654470. 附件： 1:(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
