墨婷跨境
MOT CROSS-BORDER
微信号: Mooting2018
墨婷跨境
MOT CROSS-BORDER
| 编号 | 日期 | 案件进程 |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2026-08-17 | COMPLAINT filed by Tottenham Hotspur Limited; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-25538825. |
| 4 | 2026-08-17 | MOTION by Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited for leave to file under seal |
| 5 | 2026-08-17 | CIVIL Cover Sheet |
| 6 | 2026-08-17 | NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Tottenham Hotspur Limited |
| 7 | 2026-08-17 | Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Tottenham Hotspur Limited |
| 8 | 2026-08-17 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited by Justin R. Gaudio |
| — | 2026-08-17 | CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable April M. Perry. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Young B. Kim. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). |
| 9 | 2026-08-17 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited by Amy Crout Ziegler |
| — | 2026-08-17 | 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 | 2026-08-17 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited by Jennifer Van Nacht |
| 11 | 2026-08-17 | ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited by Jennifer Mary Younan |
| 12 | 2026-08-18 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable April M. Perry: Plaintiff's Motion to Seal [4] is granted in part. The Court allows Plaintiff to file [2] and [3] under seal, but notes there is no separate "Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Matthew Collecott" as referenced in the Motion to Seal filed on the docket. The Court will not preemptively allow the sealing of exhibits not yet submitted by Plaintiff. To the extent Plaintiff does file a separate exhibit, it must be accompanied by its own motion to seal with an explanation for why sealing is appropriate. As it appears that the case filed is a "Schedule A" case, Plaintiff is 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 five 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 should 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 Schedule A cases. By 9/1/26, Plaintiff must file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder in light of the above cases and explaining why each of the defendants is properly joined to all of the others. In the alternative, Plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint by 9/1/26 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,) |
| 14 | 2026-08-21 | MEMORANDUM by Tottenham Hotspur Limited Establishing that Joinder is Proper per [12] |
| 15 | 2026-08-21 | MOTION by Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited for leave to file under Seal (Second) |
| 16 | 2026-08-21 | MOTION by Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited for temporary restraining order including a Temporary Injunction, a Temporary Asset Restraint, and Expedited Discovery |
| 17 | 2026-08-21 | MEMORANDUM by Tottenham Hotspur Limited in support of motion for temporary restraining order[16] |
| 18 | 2026-08-21 | DECLARATION of Justin R. Gaudio regarding memorandum in support of motion[17] |
| 19 | 2026-08-21 | DECLARATION of Matthew Collecott regarding memorandum in support of motion[17] |
| 21 | 2026-08-21 | NOTICE of Motion by Justin R. Gaudio for presentment of motion for temporary restraining order[16], motion for leave to file[15] before Honorable April M. Perry on 8/27/2026 at 10:00 AM. |
| 22 | 2026-08-24 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable April M. Perry: Plaintiff's Second Motion to Seal [15] is granted. Additionally, the Court notes that Plaintiff has filed the Schedule A Template [13] under seal, without filing a corresponding motion to seal as is required by Local Rule 26.2. Plaintiff is directed to file a motion to seal within two business days. Separately, the Court has reviewed Plaintiff's memorandum in support of joinder [14] and finds that Plaintiff has not adequately established joinder of all five defendants as required by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2). Under Rule 20(a)(2), joinder of multiple defendants is proper if two requirements are satisfied: (1) the claims are "with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences," and (2) there is a "question of law or fact common to all defendants." Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). In assessing Plaintiff's arguments in support of joinder, the Court accepts the factual allegations in the complaint as true but does not credit speculation or conclusory allegations. See Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 556 U.S. 662, 678 (2009); Arreola v. Godinez, 546 F.3d 788, 797 (7th Cir. 2008). Plaintiff at this stage does "not need to allege facts that definitively establish a link among the defendants; [it] need only allege facts that plausibly establish such a connection." Bug Art v. Schedule A Defs., No. 24-cv-07777, Doc. 28 at 5 (N.D. Ill. Oct. 8, 2024). In this case, the Court specifically directed Plaintiff to consider the reasoning from its prior opinion in Zaful v. Schedule A Defs., 24-cv-11111, Doc. 12 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 10, 2025), see Doc. 12, but Plaintiff's memorandum relies in part on the swarm theory from Bose Corp. v. Schedule A Defs., 334 F.R.D. 511 (N.D. Ill. Feb. 19, 2020) which this Court explicitly rejected in Zaful. See Doc. 14 at 3-4. Specifically, Plaintiff "does not allege that all five Defendants are co-conspirators or are the same entity," id. at 10, but argues instead that its claims against Defendants arise from the same series of commercial occurrences because Defendants are all "China-based," sell counterfeit jerseys with the same registered trademark, and accept payment from U.S. consumers via PayPal for shipment to Illinois. Id. at 8, 11. But none of these facts, either separately or together, satisfies the "same transaction or occurrence" requirement. China is home to more than 1.4 billion people. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_China. The fact that Defendants are all "China-based" does nothing to establish that any connection exists between them or their alleged misconduct. Similarly, PayPal has more than 36 million merchants. See https://www.chargeflow.io/blog/paypal-statistics-facts. Thus, the fact that all of the defendants use PayPal does nothing to establish any connection between them. Finally, despite Plaintiff's claim that Defendants "sold the same counterfeit product," id. at 8, none of the photographs used by Defendants nor the jerseys advertised are the same as one another. See id. at 8-9; Zaful, 2025 WL 71797, at *5 (finding joinder improper where defendants used different photographs of different products). The mere fact that Defendants have infringed on the same trademarks or used the same payment processor is not sufficient to find joinder appropriate. See Malibu Media, LLC v. Reynolds, No. 12 C 6672, 2013 WL 870618, at *13 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 7, 2013) ("While the law of joinder does not necessarily require temporal overlap or specific knowledge of other defendants, it does require more than mere allegations that two or more unrelated defendants stole the same product in the same way without ever interacting with one another."). Plaintiff argues the Court should not "invent additional requirements for Rule 20," Doc. 14 at 6, and it is not doing so. To find that "same transaction or occurrence" means "everyone in China who sells a jersey with Plaintiff's trademark and accepts money via PayPal" would turn Rule 20 into a farce. In any event, the "requirements for joinder are liberally construed in the interest of convenience and judicial economy in a manner that will secure the just, speedy, and inexpensive outcome of the action." First Time Videos, LLC v. Does 1-500, 276 F.R.D. 241, 252 (N.D. Ill. 2011) (internal citations and quotations omitted). Therefore, even if the Court believed the requirements of Rule 20(a)(2) were met which it does not it "may, in its discretion, deny joinder" as necessary. Dorsey v. Varga, 55 F.4th 1094, 1103 (7th Cir. 2022). In Schedule A cases in particular, joinder of entirely unrelated defendants often results in templated briefing rife with inaccuracies (like, for example, asserting that the "same counterfeit product" was sold when the products are patently different) and overly burdensome ex parte review, running afoul of the very principles of judicial economy and fairness on which Plaintiff rests its arguments. As such, Plaintiff may file an amended complaint against one defendant by 8/31/2026, or the entire case will be dismissed without prejudice. The Court denies Plaintiff's Motion for a Temporary Restraining Order [16] without prejudice in light of the joinder issues. Plaintiff may refile a request for a TRO specific to the defendant it intends to proceed against. Mailed notice. (jcc,) |
| 23 | 2026-08-24 | MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials. |
| 24 | 2026-08-24 | MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. |
| 25 | 2026-08-25 | MOTION by Plaintiff Tottenham Hotspur Limited for leave to file under Seal (Third) |
| 26 | 2026-08-25 | NOTICE of Motion by Justin R. Gaudio for presentment of motion for leave to file[25] before Honorable April M. Perry on 9/1/2026 at 10:00 AM. |
| 27 | 2026-08-26 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable April M. Perry: Plaintiff's Motion to Seal 25 is granted. The Court strikes the motion hearing set for 9/1/2026. Mailed notice. (jcc,) |
| 28 | 2026-08-28 | AMENDED complaint by Tottenham Hotspur Limited against summerjersey.com and terminating The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A |
| 29 | 2026-09-04 | NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Tottenham Hotspur Limited as to summerjersey.com |
| 30 | 2026-09-08 | MINUTE entry before the Honorable April M. Perry: Notice of Voluntary Dismissal 29 is acknowledged. Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, this case is dismissed without prejudice. Any or all previously set deadlines/hearings to be struck. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. (jcc,) |
| 31 | 2026-09-11 | MAILED Trademark report with certified copy of minute order dated 9/8/26 to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA |