Gag Gifts For Good Causes, LLC v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, And Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A Hereto
| GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC |
| The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, And Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A Hereto |
| 1:2024cv13117 |
| December 20, 2024 |
| U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Franklin U Valderrama |
| Trademark |
| 28 U.S.C. § 1331 Federal Question |
| Plaintiff |
Docket Report
RSS Track this Docket
This docket was last retrieved on January 15, 2025. A more recent docket listing may be available from PACER.
| Document Text |
|---|
Filing 17
ORDER: Signed by the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama on 1/15/2025. Mailed notice. (jcm)
|
| Filing 16 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: For the reasons stated in the accompanying order, Plaintiff's complaint is dismissed without prejudice for misjoinder. By 01/29/2025, Plaintiff is directed to file an amended complaint naming one defendant or a group of properly joined defendants. If the latter, Plaintiff must also file a memorandum explaining why joinder of those defendants is proper. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal #5 is granted, but all other pending motions, #3 and #4 , are denied as moot. The Court terminates #15 as a motion, as it is a memorandum of law and not a motion. Mailed notice. (jcm) |
| Filing 15 MOTION by Plaintiff Gag Gifts For Good Causes, LLCmemo to support joinder per Court's order (Gillis, Leslie) |
| Filing 14 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Gag Gifts For Good Causes, LLC (Gillis, Leslie) |
| Filing 13 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: The Court has reviewed Plaintiff's letter for judicial guidance. The Court will set a hearing on any motions as necessary. If the parties must bring an urgent issue to the Court's attention, they should file a motion or status report or contact the Court's courtroom deputy. Mailed notice. (jcm) |
| Filing 12 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: On review of the complaint and the memorandum in support of Plaintiff's motion for a temporary restraining order #3 , the Court raises the propriety of joinder of the 27 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 evidencesuch as screenshots of dozens and dozens of defendants' online storesamassed 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). 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). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11(b)(3) requires that, "factual contentions have evidentiary support or, if specifically so identified, will likely have evidentiary support after a reasonable opportunity for further investigation or discovery." Accordingly, the Court directs Plaintiff to file, on or before 01/10/2025, a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder. This memorandum shall also show cause, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(c)(3), as to why the allegation that "defendants are working in active concert" does not violate Rule 11(b)(3). 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. Mailed notice. (jcm) |
| Filing 10 letter by Gag Gifts For Good Causes, LLC for judicial guidance (Rosenbaum, Cory) |
| Filing 11 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. (tg, ) |
| Filing 9 MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials. (daj, ) |
| Filing 8 Schedule A by Gag Gifts For Good Causes, LLC (Rosenbaum, Cory) |
| 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. (lj, ) |
| CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Beth W. Jantz. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (lj, ) |
| Filing 7 MAILED trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA. (daj, ) |
| Filing 6 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC by Leslie Rafalli Gillis (Gillis, Leslie) |
| Filing 5 MOTION by Plaintiff GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC to seal document complaint #2 , MOTION by Plaintiff GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC for temporary restraining order ex parte #3 (Rosenbaum, Cory) |
| Filing 4 MOTION by Plaintiff GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC Leave to serve electronically (Rosenbaum, Cory) |
| Filing 3 MOTION by Plaintiff GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC for temporary restraining order ex parte (Attachments: #1 Supplement memo of law in support, #2 Declaration in support)(Rosenbaum, Cory) |
| Filing 2 COMPLAINT filed by GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC ; jury demand. Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22871829. (Attachments: #1 Exhibit exhibit 1, #2 Exhibit exhibit 2)(Rosenbaum, Cory) |
| Filing 1 CIVIL Cover Sheet (Rosenbaum, Cory) |
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: Gag Gifts For Good Causes, LLC 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 ] |
| Plaintiff: GAG GIFTS FOR GOOD CAUSES, LLC | |
| Represented By: | Leslie Rafalli Gillis |
| Represented By: | Cory Jay Rosenbaum |
| 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 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 ] |
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.
