MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Pursuant to Plaintiff's notice of voluntary dismissal 40 and Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1), this matter is dismissed without prejudice as to the remaining defendant with each party to bear its own costs and fees. All pending motions, hearings, and deadlines are stricken. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice

NOTICE of Voluntary Dismissal by Bo Hu

NOTICE by Bo Hu OF SETTLEMENT

ORDER AUTHORIZING ALTERNATE SERVICE OF PROCESS Signed by the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani on 12/22/2025.Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's ex parte motion for leave to conduct alternate service of process 24 is granted as to Defendant Anminy. 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 defendant. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's Ex Parte Motion to Extend the Temporary Restraining Order 27 is granted. For the reasons stated in Plaintiff's Memorandum, the Court finds good cause to extend the temporary restraining order an additional 14 days to 12/30/2025. Plaintiff shall file a preliminary injunction motion if appropriate no later than 12/23/2025. A telephone status hearing is set for 12/30/2025 at 9:15 a.m. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Bo Hu for extension of time Temporary Restraining Order and to File Preliminary Injunction

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Telephone status hearing set for 12/16/2025 is stricken. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: By close of business on 12/16/2025, Plaintiff shall submit a proposed order for Authorizing Alternate Service of Process to the Court's proposed order inbox. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Bo Hufor Order Authorizing Alternate Service of Process

附件：

1:(Affidavit /Declaration of David P. Reiner)

NOTICE by Bo Hu re SEALED Order 22 of Filing Injunction Bond

附件：

1:(Exhibit Injunction Bond)

SEALED TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER Signed by the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani on 12/2/2025. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's renewed ex parte motion for a temporary restraining order, including a temporary injunction, a temporary asset restraint, and expedited discovery 19 is granted. For the purpose of this motion, 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. Further, 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. Expedited discovery is warranted to identify defendants and to implement the asset freeze. Enter Sealed Temporary Restraining Order at 3:15 p.m. on 12/2/2025. Plaintiff shall file the TRO extension motion (or a preliminary injunction motion) if appropriate no later than 12/9/2025. Telephone status hearing is set for 12/16/2025 at 9:15 a.m. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: By close of business on 11/21/2025, Plaintiff shall submit a proposed order for entry of a temporary restraining order to the Court's proposed order inbox. Mailed notice

SEALED MOTION by Plaintiff Bo Hu RENEWED EX PARTE MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER

附件：

1:Exhibit Memorandum in Support of TRO
2:(Affidavit /Declaration of David P. Reiner)
3:Affidavit /Declaration of Bo Hu

Order on Motion to Seal

Seal

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: The Court has reviewed the plaintiff's memorandum on joinder [12] and determines, within its discretion, that plaintiff has failed to satisfy its burden to show that joinder of 93 defendants is proper in this patent infringement case. 35 U.S.C. � 299 governs joinder in patent cases and provides, in relevant part: "[P]arties that are accused [patent] infringers may be joined in one action as defendants or counterclaim defendants, or have their actions consolidated for trial, only if (1) any right to relief is asserted against the parties jointly, severally, or in the alternative with respect to or arising out of the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences relating to the making, using, importing into the United States, offering for sale, or selling of the same accused product or process; and (2) questions of fact common to all defendants or counterclaim defendants will arise in the action." 35 U.S.C. � 299(a). Joinder is improper where "accused infringers" are joined "based solely on allegations that they each have infringed the patent or patents in suit." Id. � 299(b). Claims against different defendants arise out of the same transaction or occurrence or series of transactions or occurrences when "there is a 'logical relationship' between them." Tang v. P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, 2024 WL 68332, at *1 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 4, 2024) (quoting In re EMC Corp., 677 F.3d 1351, 1358 (Fed. Cir. 2012)). Such a relationship "requires shared, overlapping facts that give rise to each cause of action, and not just distinct, albeit coincidentally identical, facts." Id. Plaintiff has not demonstrated that its claims against all defendants may be properly joined in the same case in accordance with Section 299's same transaction-or-occurrence test. Plaintiff's claim that the defendants are selling the same product as plaintiff's product is insufficient as "a claim that the defendants infringed on [the plaintiff's] design patent in the same way. is not sufficient to link one defendant's infringement to another as part of 'the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences'" under � 299. Tang, 2024 WL 68332, at *2 (quoting 35 U.S.C. � 299(a)); Este Lauder Cosmetics, Ltd. v. P'ships and Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182, 187 (N.D. Ill. 2020) ("[C]ommitting the same type of violation in the same way does not link defendants together for the purpose of joinder.") (quoting AF Holdings, LLC v. Does 1-1508, 752 F.3d 990, 998 (D.C. Cir. 2014)). For the same reasons, joinder is also improper under Rule 20. Even if the Court were mistaken in its joinder analysis, the Court exercises its discretion to not permit joinder in this case. See Dorsey v. Varga, 55 F.4th 1094, 1103 (7th Cir. 2022). Joining this many defendants in one case simply will not promote judicial economy. See Este Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 189 ("[P]resenting dozens or hundreds of defendants in one lawsuit actually undermines judicial economy, because this Court must evaluate the evidence submitted in support of liability and, eventually, damages. That is especially true in the ex parte setting of a temporary restraining order, as well as for default-judgment motions."); Art Ask Agency v. Individuals, Corps., Ltd. Liab. Co., P'ships & Unincorporated Ass'ns Identified on Schedule "A", 2021 WL 5493226, at *3 (N.D. Ill. Nov. 23, 2021) (noting that "joinder in this case may yield significant financial benefits to [plaintiff] at the judiciary's expense."). Accordingly, the Court dismisses defendant Nos. 2-93 without prejudice. The case will proceed against defendant No. 1. If plaintiff files a new action against defendants Nos. 2-93, plaintiff shall indicate on the Civil Cover Sheet that the filed case is related to this matter. See Local Rule 40.3(b)(2). Plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order [8] is denied without prejudice. Plaintiff's motion to seal [10] is granted. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an amended complaint in accordance with this Order by 10/29/2025. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable Sunil R. Harjani: Plaintiff's motion for leave to file under seal [10] and plaintiff's motion for temporary restraining order [8] are entered and continued. Upon review of the amended complaint and the TRO submissions, the Court sua sponte raises the proprietary of joinder of 93 defendants in this case. See, e.g., Estee Lauder Cosmetics Ltd. v. Schedule A, 334 F.R.D. 182 (N.D. Ill. 2020). By 10/20/2025, 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 single defendant or a smaller subset of defendants along with its memorandum explaining specifically why each defendant is properly joined to all of the others. Estee Lauder, 334 F.R.D. at 189. Mailed notice

MOTION by Plaintiff Bo Hu to seal Certain Documents Containing Identifying Information About the Defendants (Renewed)

AMENDED complaint by Bo Hu against The Individuals, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A and terminating John Doe (REDACTED)

SEALED DOCUMENT by Plaintiff Bo Hu EX PARTE MOTION FOR ENTRY OF A TEMPORARY RESTRAINING ORDER, INCLUDING A TEMPORARY INJUNCTION, A TEMPORARY ASSET RESTRAINT, AND EXPEDITED DISCOVERY (Attachments: # (1) Exhibit Memorandum in Support of TRO, # (2) Affidavit /Declaration of Bo Hu, # (3) Exhibit 1 to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (4) Exhibit 2 to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (5) Exhibit 3 (Part 1) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (6) Exhibit 3 (Part 2) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (7) Exhibit 3 (Part 3) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (8) Exhibit 3 (Part 4) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (9) Exhibit 3 (Part 5) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (10) Exhibit 3 (Part 6) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (11) Exhibit 3 (Part 7) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (12) Exhibit 3 (Part 8) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (13) Exhibit 3 (Part 9) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (14) Exhibit 3 (Part 10) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (15) Exhibit 3 (Part 11) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (16) Exhibit 3 (Part 12) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (17) Exhibit 3 (Part 13) to Declaration of Bo Hu, # (18) Affidavit /Declaration of David P. Reiner, II)

Order on Motion to Seal

MOTION by Plaintiff John Doe to seal Certain Documents Containing Identifying Information About the Defendants

COMPLAINT (REDACTED) filed by John Doe; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-24138631.

附件：

1:Civil Cover Sheet