Case: 1:24-cv-04067 Document #: 24 Filed: 07/19/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:721
`
`UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
`FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.7.1.1
`Eastern Division
`
`HONGKONG LEYUZHEN TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD.
`
`Plaintiff,
`
`v.
`
`The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability
`Companies, Partnerships and Unincorporated
`Associations Identified in Schedule A Hereto
`
`Defendant.
`
`NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY
`
`Case No.:
`1:24−cv−04067
`Honorable
`LaShonda A.
`Hunt
`
`This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, July 19, 2024:
`
` MINUTE entry before the Honorable LaShonda A. Hunt: The Court previously
`entered an order [21] finding that Plaintiff had failed to meet its burden of establishing
`that permissive joinder of 105 defendants in this case was proper under Fed. R. Civ. P.
`20(a)(2). The Court pointed out that it was not persuaded by Plaintiff's contention that
`joinder was proper because the alleged acts of infringement occurred on the same online
`platform, were accomplished through a common supply chain source, and infringed on the
`same or similar registered copyrights. Plaintiff was granted leave to file an amended
`complaint and amended Schedule A consistent with that ruling. In response, Plaintiff filed
`an amended Schedule A [22−2] listing 35 defendants and attached a supplement to its
`pending TRO motion including only the defendants' names, an image of the copyrighted
`photo, an image of the infringing product, and a link to the infringing product. Plaintiff
`also filed an amended complaint [22] which is identical in substance to its original
`complaint. Plaintiff's amended complaint alleges only that "[u]nique identifiers common
`to Defendants' internet stores, such as design elements and similarities in Defendant[s']
`unlawful use of the Asserted Brand Copyrights, establish a logical relationship between
`[Defendants] and suggest that Defendants' illegal operations arise out of the same
`transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences" and Defendants "bear
`similarities and indicia of interrelatedness, suggesting they are manufactured by and come
`from a common source... include[ing a] lack of contact information, same or similar
`products for sale, identically or similarly priced items and sales discounts, shared hosting
`service, similar name servers, and their common infringement of Plaintiff's Asserted
`Brand Copyrights." Plaintiff presumably contends that such similarities support its
`contention that Defendants' actions arise out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series
`of transactions or occurrences, but the Court remains unconvinced. See Viking Arm AS v.
`P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, No. 24 C 1566, 2024 WL
`2953105, at *3 (N.D. Ill. June 6, 2024) (finding that plaintiff had merely identified a
`"small subset of the 181 defendants who are copycats of Plaintiff's style and each other,
`
`

`

`Case: 1:24-cv-04067 Document #: 24 Filed: 07/19/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:722
`
`but that does not make them all partners in collusion) (emphasis in original); Bailie, et al.
`v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, No. 24 C 2150, 2024 WL
`2209698, at *5 (N.D. Ill. May 15, 2024) (finding use of same images and similar product
`titles and descriptions insufficient to support joinder); Ilustrata Servicos Design, Ltd. v.
`P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, No. 21 C 5993, 2021 WL
`5396690, at * 2 (Nov. 18, 2021) (holding that plaintiff's speculation that defendants were
`interrelated because they shared notable features "including use of the user name
`registration patterns, unique shopping cart platforms, accepted payment methods,
`check−out methods, meta data, illegitimate SEO tactics, HTML user−defined variables,
`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" did not support joinder); Bose Corp. v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns
`Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 511, 514 (N.D. Ill. Fed. 19, 2020) (holding that even
`if defendants were selling the same products and defendants' webpages were identical
`"that would not overcome the likelihood that Defendants are just copycats" and that an
`allegation that defendants communicate through chat rooms and website based on
`"information and belief," without connecting any defendants to such chat rooms or
`websites, is insufficient to support joinder). Because Plaintiff has failed to cure the
`misjoinder here, the Court exercises its discretion to do so. Therefore, the Court dismisses
`Defendants 2 through 35 without prejudice for improper joinder. This action will proceed
`as to Defendant 1 only. 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 [9], [14] as to
`all defendants is terminated as moot. By 7/26/24, Plaintiff may file a renewed TRO
`motion as to Defendant 1, whose identity shall remain under seal until that date. If
`Plaintiff does not request further relief as to Defendant 1, all previously sealed documents
`will be unsealed, and this case may be dismissed without prejudice. Mailed notice(mjc, )
`
`ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of
`Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was
`generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and
`criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please
`refer to it for additional information.
`
`For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our
`web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.
`
`