1:25-cv-04162
| 日期 | 描述 |
|---|---|
| 2025-10-09 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: Any party to this action has until October 23, 2025, to justify the continued need to seal any documents in this case. The Court intends to unseal all documents in this case after that date. Mailed notice. |
| 2025-05-19 | EMAILED Trademark report with certified copy of minute order dated 05/16/25 to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |
| 2025-05-16 | ENTERED JUDGMENT. Mailed notice. |
| 2025-05-16 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: The plaintiff did not file an amended complaint. Therefore, civil case terminated. The Court reminds the plaintiff that Local Rule 40.3(b)(2) states that, "When a case is dismissed with prejudice or without, and a second case is filed involving the same parties and relating to the same subject matter, the second case shall be assigned to the judge to whom the first case was assigned. The designation sheet presented at the time the second case is filed shall indicate the number of the earlier case and the name of the judge to whom it was assigned." Mailed notice. |
| 2025-04-28 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: This case is dismissed without prejudice for misjoinder. The plaintiff contends that joinder is proper because there is a logical relationship between the defendants. (R. 10 at 3.) That logical relationship stems from alleged similarities amongst the defendants, to include each defendant infringing the plaintiff's mark, selling counterfeit versions of the plaintiff's product, and setting up online stores to sell the counterfeits under a cloak of anonymity. (Id.) It is worth noting that the "logical relationship" test has been used to determined whether claims arise from the same transaction or occurrence. In re Price, 42 F.3d 1068, 1073 (7th Cir. 1994). It is designed to determine whether claims have a common origin. See id. ("Applying the logical relationship test, we find the relationship between the Prices' claim and the IRS' notice of intent to levy is derived from the same transaction or occurrence."). Here, the plaintiff seeks t |
| 2025-04-25 | MEMORANDUM by Bang Bang Merchandise LLP on the Propriety of Joinder |
| 2025-04-18 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: The plaintiff has filed a complaint alleging infringement by 111 defendants. This case follows a pattern common to "Schedule A" cases where plaintiffs allege that defendants employ similar methods and "work in active concert" to infringe plaintiffs' intellectual property. But experience has shown that not all defendants named in a Schedule A case work together. More importantly, experience has shown that joinder under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20 is rarely appropriate in Schedule A cases. See, e.g., Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. v. The Partnerships, 24 CV 9401, Dkt. 27 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2024). Accordingly, the Court raises the propriety of joinder and requires the plaintiff to file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder on or before May 2, 2025. Alternatively, by the same date, the plaintiff may file an amended complaint naming one or more defendants; however, if the plaintiff names multiple defendants, the plaintiff mu |
| 2025-04-17 | EMAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials |
| 2025-04-17 | EMAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |
| 2025-04-16 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Bang Bang Merchandise LLP by Sofia Quezada Hastings (Quezada Hastings, Sofia) |
| 2025-04-16 | MOTION by Plaintiff Bang Bang Merchandise LLP for leave to file Certain Documents Under Seal |
| 2025-04-16 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Bang Bang Merchandise LLP by Karolina Jozwiak |
| 2025-04-16 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 2025-04-16 | SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Bang Bang Merchandise LLP Schedule A to Complaint regarding complaint 1 |
| 2025-04-16 | COMPLAINT filed by Bang Bang Merchandise LLP; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23358405. |
先核对信息，再决定下一步
请以案号、法院、立案日期与 docket 记录交叉确认。页面展示的是公开信息汇总，不等同于法院对侵权、TRO 是否签发或资金状态的认定。
