最近更新：2025-01-18
2025-cv-00228
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 01/15/2025 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[28] |
| 01/15/2025 | MEMORANDUM by Dyson Technology Limited in support of motion for miscellaneous relief[27] |
| 01/15/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited for Electronic Service of Process Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(f)(3) |
| 01/15/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Exhibit 2 - Part 1 regarding declaration[25] 附件： 1:(Exhibit 2-1) |
| 01/15/2025 | DECLARATION of Giles Samuel Lane regarding memorandum in support of motion[23] 附件： 1:Exhibit 1 |
| 01/15/2025 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[23] |
| 01/15/2025 | MEMORANDUM by Dyson Technology Limited in support of motion for temporary restraining order[22] |
| 01/15/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited for temporary restraining order including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
| 01/15/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Exhibit 1 - Part 1 regarding amended complaint[19] |
| 01/15/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Amended Schedule A regarding amended complaint[19] |
| 01/15/2025 | SECOND AMENDED complaint by Dyson Technology Limited against The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A 附件： 1:Exhibit 2 |
| 01/15/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons stated therein, Plaintiff's motion to strike amended complaint as a duplicate [16] is granted. The Clerk of Court is directed to remove [15] from the docket. Mailed notice. |
| 01/15/2025 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons stated in the motion, the Court grants Plaintiff's motion to seal [4]. However, on review of the Complaint [1] and Schedule A [2], the Court raises the propriety of joinder of the 63 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 evidence such as screenshots of dozens and dozens of defendants' online stores amassed 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). However, for cases "relating to patents[,]" the American Invents Act (AIA) governs joinder. See 35 U.S.C. § 299(a); Pathway IP LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on the Attached Schedule A, 24-cv-5218 Dkt. 230 (Nov. 8. 2024). Here, Plaintiff's allegations purport to establish joinder under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2) and are merely conclusory. For example, Plaintiff alleges that "E-commerce stores operating under the Seller Aliases share unique identifiers establishing a logical relationship between them, suggesting that Defendants' operation arises out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences." R. 1 at para. 3. 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). Accordingly, the Court directs Plaintiff to file, on or before 01/22/2025, a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder. 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. If Plaintiff believes that Rule 20, rather than the AIA, governs joinder in this case, it must explain why. Mailed notice. |
| 01/14/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited to strike amended complaint[15] as Duplicate Document on the Docket |
| 01/14/2025 | AMENDED complaint by Dyson Technology Limited against The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A 附件： 1:Exhibit 2 |
| 01/14/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Exhibit 1 - Part 1 regarding amended complaint[12] |
| 01/14/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Amended Schedule A regarding amended complaint[12] |
| 01/14/2025 | AMENDED complaint by Dyson Technology Limited against The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A 附件： 1:Exhibit 2 |
| 01/10/2025 | 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. |
| 01/10/2025 | CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 1). |
| 01/08/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited by Andrew Daniel Burnham |
| 01/08/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited by Justin Tyler Joseph |
| 01/08/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited by Lawrence J. Crain |
| 01/08/2025 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited by Justin R. Gaudio |
| 01/08/2025 | Notice of Claims involving Patents by Dyson Technology Limited |
| 01/08/2025 | NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Dyson Technology Limited |
| 01/08/2025 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 01/08/2025 | MOTION by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited for leave to file under seal |
| 01/08/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Exhibit 1 - Parts 1-2 regarding complaint[1] |
| 01/08/2025 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Dyson Technology Limited Schedule A regarding complaint[1] |
| 01/08/2025 | COMPLAINT filed by Dyson Technology Limited; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22928960. 附件： 1:Exhibit 2 |
