Societe Pour L'oeuvre et La Memoire D'antoine De Saint Exupery - Succession De Saint Exupery-D'agay v. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A Heret

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion to Extend the Temporary Restraining Order 51 is granted. For the reasons stated in Plaintiff's Motion, the Court finds good cause to extend the temporary restraining order an additional 14 days to 11/13/2024. Plaintiff shall file a preliminary injunction motion if appropriate no later than 11/6/2024. Telephone status hearing set for 10/30/2024 is stricken and reset to 11/13/2024 at 9:15 a.m. Mailed notice

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani on 10/16/2024. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's motion to exceed page limitation 44 and ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, expedited discovery, and electronic service of process 45 are granted. Plaintiff's submissions establish that, were defendants to learn of these proceedings before the execution of plaintiff's requested preliminary injunctive relief, there is a significant risk that defendants could destroy relevant documentary evidence and hide or transfer assets beyond the reach of the Court. Accordingly, subject to unsealing at an appropriate time, plaintiff may file under seal the documents identified in the motion to seal. The Temporary Restraining Order being entered along with this minute order shall also be placed under seal. In addition, for the purpose of the motions cited above, plaintiff's filings support proceeding on an ex parte basis at this time. Specifically, and as noted above, were defendants to be informed of this proceeding before a TRO could issue, the Court finds that it is likely that their assets and websites would be redirected, thus defeating plaintiff's interests in identifying defendants, stopping defendants' infringing conduct, and obtaining an accounting. In addition, the evidence submitted by plaintiff shows a likelihood of success on the merits (including evidence of active infringement and sales into Illinois), that the harm to plaintiff is irreparable, and that an injunction is in the public interest. An injunction serves the public interest because of the consumer confusion caused by counterfeit products, and there is no countervailing harm to defendants from an order directing them to stop infringement. The Court presumptively requires a bond of $1,000 per defendant. Electronic service of process does not violate any treaty and is consistent with due process because it effectively communicates the pendency of this action to defendants. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and to implement the asset freeze. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order at 12:15 p.m. on 10/16/2024. Plaintiff shall file the TRO extension motion (or a preliminary injunction motion) if appropriate no later than 10/23/2024. Telephone status hearing is set for 10/30/2024 at 9:15 a.m. Members of the public and media will be able to call in to listen to this hearing but will be placed on mute. The call-in number is (855) 244-8681 and the access code is 172 628 1276##. Persons granted remote access to proceedings are reminded of the general prohibition against photographing, recording, and rebroadcasting of court proceedings. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: The Court has reviewed the plaintiff's memorandum on joinder 31 and determines, within its discretion, that plaintiff has failed to satisfy its burden to show that joinder of 166 defendants is proper in this matter under Fed. R. Civ. P. 20(a)(2). See Estee Lauder Cosms. Ltd. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182, 185 (N.D. Ill. 2020) (noting that "[plaintiff] bears the burden of demonstrating that joinder is proper"); H-D U.S.A. v. Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", 2021 WL 780486, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Mar. 1, 2021) ("The Seventh Circuit has recognized the broad discretion that district courts have in remedying misjoinder, so long as the court's decision avoids unnecessary harm to the parties."). The Court observes that plaintiff's memorandum includes a fair amount of conclusory language about a logical relationship among all defendants but not much, if any, facts to actually support that relationship. Beyond alleging that the 166 defendants are infringing upon plaintiff's trademarks, plaintiff claims only generally that joinder is proper because, inter alia, the defendants: use common design elements, offer similar counterfeit products for sale, omit contact information or other information for identifying Defendants, offer no credible information regarding their physical addresses, use the same advertising and marketing strategies to target consumers while attempting to evade enforcement, and have virtually identical website layouts; the counterfeit products "bare similar irregularities and indicia of being counterfeit to one another" suggesting they "were manufactured by and come from a common sources;" and defendant stores have "other notable common features, including use of the same online marketplace account registration patterns, unique shopping cart platforms, accepted payment methods, check-out methods, meta data, illegitimate SEO tactics, HADJL user-defined variables, domain redirection, lack of contact information, identical or similarly priced similar hosting services, similar name serves, and the use of the same text and images." (Doc.12-1, ¶ 14; Doc. 30 at 4, 11). But plaintiff provides no specific examples of such shared features or similar irregularities and instead the record contains Exhibit 2 to the Declaration of Olivier d'AGAY (which includes 1481 pages of screenshots from defendants' listings) without providing the Court with specific additional information from those listings that might in fact support joinder in this matter. See Docs. 13-28. It is not this Court's job to sift through hundreds of pages of materials to look for a relationship between the defendants. Moreover, "defendants with nearly identical product descriptions may in fact share no ties, with each simply copying the same description from elsewhere." Estee Lauder Cosms. Ltd., et al. v. The Partnerships, et al., No. 20-cv-00845 (N.D. Ill. June 22, 2020) (Lee, J.) (Doc. 40 at 9); see also Estee Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 188. Within its discretion, on this record, the Court finds that plaintiff has failed to meet its burden to show that joinder is proper here. See Art Ask Agency v. Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships & Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule "A", 2021 WL 5493226, at *2 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 23, 2021) (holding similar conclusory statements do not support joinder); H-D U.S.A., 2021 WL 780486, at *3 (finding joinder improper where plaintiff failed to allege "any nonconclusory facts to form a basis for a conclusion that the defendants' conduct overlaps enough to warrant joinder"). Accordingly, plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order 11 and motion to exceed page limitation 10 are denied without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 7 is granted. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint with a smaller subset of defendants along with a memorandum explaining specifically why each defendant is properly joined to all of the others by 8/30/2024. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal 7, plaintiff's motion to exceed page limitation 10, and motion for temporary restraining order 11 are entered and continued. Upon review of the complaint and the TRO submissions, the Court sua sponte raises the proprietary of joinder of over 165 defendants in this case. See, e.g. Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd. v. Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182 (N.D. Ill. 2020). By 7/30/2024, plaintiff shall file a supplemental memorandum addressing the propriety of joinder in light of the principles described in Estee Lauder. In the alternative, plaintiff has leave to file an amended complaint with a smaller subset of defendants. Estee Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 189. A telephone status hearing is set for 8/13/2024 at 9:15 a.m. Mailed notice