|
10
|
2026-08-03 |
MINUTE entry before the Honorable Mary M. Rowland: Plaintiff's motion to file under seal [5] is granted. Based on the allegations in Plaintiff's Complaint 1, the Court believes that a personal jurisdiction supplement is necessary to demonstrate this Court's personal jurisdiction over the Defendants. Plaintiff is reminded that personal jurisdiction over an online retailer is not established merely because the retailer's website is available in Illinois. Liu v. Monthly, No. 25-2074, 2026 WL 681773, at *2 (7th Cir. Mar. 9, 2026). Instead, minimum contacts with Illinois are found only where an Illinois customer actually purchased a product from the online retailer and the retailer shipped the product to Illinois. Id.; see also Curry v. Revolution Labs., LLC, 949 F.3d 385, 392-93 (7th Cir. 2020). To ensure the Court that personal jurisdiction over the Defendants exists, by 8/30/26, Plaintiff shall file a personal jurisdiction supplement as a separate entry on the docket. The supplement shall include a table with the following columns: (1) No.: the number corresponding to the Defendant's position in Schedule A; (2) Name: the name of the entity sued, e.g., the online account doing the alleged infringement; (3) Item Purchased: the name of the infringing item purchased from the Defendant; (4) Purchase Price: the amount paid for the item; (5) Ship to Address: the city in Illinois that the item was shipped to; (6) Date Received: the date the item was received at the Illinois address. If Plaintiff is relying on alternative means to establish personal jurisdiction that does not fit into this table format, Plaintiff shall explain how the alternative means establishes personal jurisdiction over each Defendant in the personal jurisdiction supplement. The Court will not consider any motions for TRO or preliminary injunctions until it is satisfied that personal jurisdiction over the Defendants has been established. Mailed notice. |
