2025-cv-08067

COMPLAINT filed by Anagram International LLC; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-23756022.

Exhibit 1

Exhibit 2

Exhibit 3

(Exhibit 4)

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Anagram International LLC Schedule A to the Complaint 1

CIVIL Cover Sheet

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Keith A. Vogt

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Holleb Hotaling, Keri L. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 3).

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.

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Yanling Jiang

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Yi Bu

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Adam Grodman

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Cameron Eugene Mcintyre

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Monica Rita Martin

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Anagram International LLC by Christopher Romero

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Anagram International LLC

Amended Schedule A to the Complaint 1 and Schedule A 2 by Anagram International LLC

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Jeremy C. Daniel: The plaintiff has filed a complaint alleging infringement by 48 defendants. This case follows a pattern common to "Schedule A" cases where plaintiffs allege that defendants employ similar methods and "work in active concert" to infringe plaintiffs' intellectual property. But experience has shown that not all defendants named in a Schedule A case work together. More importantly, experience has shown that joinder under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20 is rarely appropriate in Schedule A cases. See, e.g., Toyota Motor Sales, USA, Inc. v. The Partnerships, 24 CV 9401, Dkt. 27 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 18, 2024). Accordingly, the Court raises the propriety of joinder and requires the plaintiff to file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder on or before July 31, 2025. Alternatively, by the same date, the plaintiff may file an amended complaint naming one or more defendants; however, if the plaintiff names multiple defendants, the plaintiff must show that joinder of those defendants is proper. All pending motions are hereby stayed pending resolution of the joinder issue. Further, should the plaintiff (1) file an amended complaint naming fewer defendants in this case, (2) file a separate complaint naming one or more of the remaining defendants originally named in this case, and (3) assert the same claims against those defendants, the Court reminds the plaintiff of Local Rule 40.3(b)(2), which requires the plaintiff to indicate the number of the this case and the name of the judge to whom it was assigned. Mailed notice.