2025-cv-00247

COMPLAINT filed by Taylor Bates; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-22931355.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Taylor Bates Schedule A to Complaint 1

CIVIL Cover Sheet

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Keith A. Vogt

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Christopher Romero

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Monica Rita Martin

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Taylor Bates by Yi Bu

MOTION by Plaintiff Taylor Bates for leave to file under seal

MOTION by Plaintiff Taylor Bates for leave to file excess pages

MEMORANDUM in Support of 13 Exparte Motion

Declaration of Keith A. Vogt

Exhibit 1-4, of Keith A. Vogt's Declaration

Declaration of Taylor Bates

(Exhibit 1, of Taylor Bates' Declaration)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Taylor Bates Sealed Exhibit 2, Declaration of Taylor Bates regarding memorandum in support of motion, 14

Exhibit 2-1

Exhibit 2-2

Exhibit 2-3

Exhibit 2-4

Exhibit 2-5

Exhibit 2-6

Exhibit 2-7

(Exhibit 2-8)

MAILED Copyright report to Registrar, Washington DC

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: On the Court's initiative, all pending motions are held in abeyance, and the case is stayed pending further order. This stay, which the Court is entering in other so-called "Schedule A" cases on its docket where requests for temporary restraining orders remain pending, is intended to permit the Court the opportunity to reassess its previous approach in Schedule A litigation involving Lanham Act, Copyright Act, and Patent Act claims typically brought on an ex parte basis against various online merchants. This reassessment will consider, among other things, whether: (1) ex parte proceedings are appropriate in these types of cases; (2) the routine sealing of parts or all of the docket is appropriate; (3) the routine granting of temporary restraining orders on an ex parte basis is a sound exercise of judicial discretion; (4) the routine granting of prejudgment asset restraints is a sound exercise of judicial discretion; and (5) the mass joinder of defendants is appropriate under the circumstances typically present in Schedule A cases. Plaintiff Taylor Bates remains free, of course, to dismiss this action voluntarily if they wish to pursue their claims in another District, but no supplemental briefing on the pending motions may be filed absent advance leave of Court. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff's motion for an ex parte temporary restraining order and prejudgment asset restraint (Dkt. 13) is denied substantially for the reasons provided in the opinion denying similar requested relief in Eicher Motors Limited v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A Hereto, No. 24-cv-02937, 2025 WL 2299593 (N.D. Ill. Aug. 8, 2025). Plaintiff's motion to seal (Dkt. 11) is granted subject to later reconsideration; the documents provisionally filed under seal may remain under seal for the time being. The request for alternative service (Dkt. 13) and motion for leave to file excess pages (Dkt. 12) are granted. An in-person status hearing is set for 8/19/2025 at 9:30 A.M.; lead counsel must appear in person at the hearing, which will be stricken if Plaintiff elects to dismiss this action voluntarily. Plaintiff is invited to file a motion seeking certification of an interlocutory appeal of this ruling. Mailed notice. (jcc,)

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Due to a change in the Court's schedule, the in-person status hearing set for 8/19/2025 at 9:30 A.M. is reset for 8/19/2025 at 3:00 P.M. TIME CHANGE ONLY. Mailed notice.

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: In-person status hearing held on 8/19/2025. Lead Counsel for Plaintiff, Keith Vogt, failed to appear contrary to the order directing him to appear. As a result, Mr. Vogt must show cause orally why he failed to abide by the Court's order to appear in-person as lead counsel in this case. The rule to show cause may be discharged by a stipulation of dismissal. On the merits, any statement by Plaintiff in further support of the joinder of all Defendants must be filed on or before 8/27/2025. Any motion to certify the case for interlocutory appeal shall be filed on or before 8/27/2025. A continued in-person status hearing is set for 9/2/2025 at 10:30 A.M. Mailed notice.

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Taylor Bates as to the Defendant(s) Identified in Schedule A

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John F. Kness: Plaintiff has filed a notice of voluntary dismissal (Dkt. 21). Because the notice of dismissal was filed before the opposing parties served either an answer or a motion for summary judgment, the case is dismissed without prejudice consistent with the terms of the notice and by operation of Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. See Nelson v. Napolitano, 657 F.3d 586, 587 (7th Cir. 2011) (Rule 41(a)(1)(A) notice of dismissal "is self-executing and effective without further action from the court"). Each party is to bear its own fees and costs. The rule to show cause 20 is discharged, and the hearing set for 9/2/2025 is stricken. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice.