Casio Computer Co., Ltd. v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto
| Casio Computer Co., Ltd. |
| The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto and The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Amended Schedule A Hereto |
| 1:2024cv11007 |
| October 25, 2024 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| April M Perry |
| Trademark |
| 15 U.S.C. § 44 Trademark Infringement |
| Both |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on November 26, 2024. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
| Filing 26 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Amended Schedule A (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 25 AMENDED complaint by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. against The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Amended Schedule A Hereto (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 24 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.(td, ) |
| Filing 23 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 (gel, ) |
| Filing 22 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. (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 21 Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 20 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 6 of Takeyama Declaration (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 19 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 5 of Takeyama Declaration (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 18 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 4 of Takeyama Declaration (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 17 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 3 of Takeyama Declaration (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 16 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 2 of Takeyama Declaration (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 15 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Exhibit 2 Part 1 of Takeyama Declaration (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 14 MEMORANDUM by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. in support of motion for temporary restraining order, #13 (Attachments: #1 Declaration Takeyama Declaration, #2 Exhibit 1, #3 Declaration Hierl Declaration, #4 Exhibit Hierl Exhibit 1, #5 Exhibit Hierl Exhibit 2, #6 Exhibit Hierl Exhibit 3)(Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 13 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 (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 12 MOTION by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. for leave to file excess pages Plaintiff's Motion to Exceed Page Limitation (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 11 MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials (lm, ) |
| Filing 10 MAILED trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA (lm, ) |
| Filing 9 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Casio Computer Co., Ltd. (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 8 SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. Sealed Schedule A (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 7 MOTION by Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. to seal document Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by John Wilson (Wilson, John) |
| Filing 5 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by Robert Payton Mcmurray (Mcmurray, Robert) |
| Filing 4 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by William Benjamin Kalbac (Kalbac, William) |
| Filing 3 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Casio Computer Co., Ltd. by Michael A. Hierl (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 2 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Hierl, Michael) |
| Filing 1 COMPLAINT filed by Casio Computer Co., Ltd.; Jury Demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22654470. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit 1)(Hierl, Michael) |
| 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. (man, ) |
| 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). (man, ) |
Access additional case information on PACER
Use the links below to access additional information about this case on the U.S. Court's PACER system. A subscription to PACER is required.
Access this case on the Illinois Northern District Court's Electronic Court Filings (ECF) System
- Search for Party Aliases
- Associated Cases
- Attorneys
- Case File Location
- Case Summary
- Docket Report
- History/Documents
- Parties
- Related Transactions
- Check Status
| Search for this case: Casio Computer Co., Ltd. v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto | |
|---|---|
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Defendant: The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Amended Schedule A Hereto | |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
| Plaintiff: Casio Computer Co., Ltd. | |
| Represented By: | Michael A. Hierl |
| Represented By: | William Benjamin Kalbac |
| Represented By: | Robert Payton Mcmurray |
| Represented By: | John Wilson |
| Search News | [ Google News | Marketwatch | Wall Street Journal | Financial Times | New York Times ] |
| Search Finance | [ Google Finance | Yahoo Finance | Hoovers | SEC Edgar Filings ] |
| Search Web | [ Unicourt | Justia Dockets | Legal Web | Google | Bing | Yahoo | Ask ] |
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
