2025-cv-13829

COMPLAINT filed by Marshall Amplification PLC; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-24331405.

(Exhibit 1)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC Exhibit 2 regarding complaint 1

(Exhibit 2)

SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC Schedule A regarding complaint 1

MOTION by Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC for leave to file under seal

CIVIL Cover Sheet

NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by Marshall Amplification PLC

Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by Marshall Amplification PLC

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC by Justin R. Gaudio

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC by Amy Crout Ziegler

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC by Luana Faria De Souza (Faria De Souza, Luana)

CASE ASSIGNED to the Honorable John Robert Blakey. Designated as Magistrate Judge the Honorable Jeffrey T. Gilbert. Case assignment: Random assignment. (Civil Category 2). (Text entry; no document attached.)

MAILED trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA

MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials

AMENDED complaint by Marshall Amplification PLC against Xingrunshangmao and terminating The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

Exhibit 1

(Exhibit 2)

Notice of Withdrawal of Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Under Seal by Marshall Amplification PLC

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Plaintiff initially filed a complaint seeking to sue nine separate defendants in this single trademark infringement suit, see [1], [3]. Once the case was reassigned to this Court, however, Plaintiff filed an amended complaint, which names just one Defendant, and thus avoids any joinder issues. See [13]. But before Plaintiff may proceed, it must file a supplemental report confirming whether it has previously named any of the nine defendants identified in this case in a prior case asserting infringement of the same intellectual property. See Julie Stiebritz v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 1:25-cv-03459, at [19] (N.D. Ill. Apr. 9, 2025) (dismissing the case because plaintiff previously named defendants in a prior case and dismissed them to avoid an unfavorable joinder ruling, which constitutes forum shopping). Plaintiff shall file the report by 12/1/25. Additionally, based upon Plaintiff's notice of withdrawal, [14], the motion for leave to file under seal [4] is withdrawn, and the Clerk shall terminate the entry as a pending motion. Mailed notice.

Plaintiff's Supplemental Response to Order 15 by Marshall Amplification PLC

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Robert Blakey: Plaintiff filed a supplemental brief 16, which indicates that, prior to initiating this case, Plaintiff named all of the defendants identified in this case in three prior cases. In two of those prior cases, Plaintiff voluntarily amended its complaint to drop all but one defendant once the case was assigned to a particular judge. Such conduct suggests that Plaintiff lacks a good faith factual and legal basis to join the defendants in a single proceeding. And repeatedly naming the same group of defendants in new cases until a case is assigned to a judge the plaintiff believes to be hospitable to joinder constitutes an abuse of process. As a result, the Court issues an order to show cause on or before 12/15/2025, why this case should not be dismissed for an abuse of process. Mailed notice.

Plaintiff's Response to Order [17] by Marshall Amplification PLC

Exhibit 1

ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff Marshall Amplification PLC by Hannah Elizabeth Dawson