TRO101 logo TRO101

2026-cv-13284

NBA Properties, Inc. v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

法院:伊利诺伊州北法院
发案日期:2026-10-28
原告:NBA Properties, Inc.
代理律所:GBC
诉讼类型:商标
# Date Description
[+] 1 2026-10-28 COMPLAINT filed by NBA Properties, Inc.; Filing fee $ 405, receipt number AILNDC-25871659.
[+] 2 2026-10-28 SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. Exhibit 2 - Parts 1-2 regarding complaint[1]
3 2026-10-28 SEALED EXHIBIT by Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. Schedule A regarding complaint[1]
4 2026-10-28 MOTION by Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. for leave to file under seal
5 2026-10-28 CIVIL Cover Sheet
6 2026-10-28 NOTIFICATION of Affiliates pursuant to Local Rule 3.2 by NBA Properties, Inc.
7 2026-10-28 Notice of Claims Involving Trademarks by NBA Properties, Inc.
8 2026-10-28 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. by Justin R. Gaudio
9 2026-10-28 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. by Amy Crout Ziegler
10 2026-10-28 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. by Kahlia Roe Halpern
[+] 11 2026-10-28 ATTORNEY Appearance for Plaintiff NBA Properties, Inc. by Justin Tyler Joseph
12 2026-10-29 MAILED Trademark report to Patent Trademark Office, Alexandria VA
13 2026-10-29 MAILED to plaintiff(s) counsel Lanham Mediation Program materials
[+] 14 2026-10-29 AMENDED complaint by NBA Properties, Inc. against prismirror and terminating The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A
15 2026-10-29 Notice of Withdrawal of Plaintiffs Motion for Leave to File Under Seal by NBA Properties, Inc.
16 2026-10-30 MINUTE entry before the Honorable LaShonda A. Hunt: This case has been assigned to Judge LaShonda A. Hunt. In light of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint and Notice of Withdrawal, [14] [15], the Clerk's office is directed, forthwith, to unseal the document(s) filed at [2] and [3]. The Clerk's office is directed, forthwith, to update the caption to reflect that the Defendant in this case is "PRISMIRROR". On review of the Amended Complaint [4] and other filings, the Court questions whether Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged personal jurisdiction over the defendants. To adequately plead personal jurisdiction, Plaintiff must sufficiently allege that the defendants actually sold the allegedly infringing product to a customer in Illinois. See Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090, 1093-94 (7th Cir. 2026) (citing Curry v. Revolution Lab'ys, LLC, 949 F.3d 385, 400 (7th Cir. 2020)). Plaintiff's amended complaint alleges sales in this district, but those allegations are conclusory. While Exhibit 2 of the Amended Complaint [14-2] includes a screenshot of a page showing that Defendant could sell products to consumers in Illinois, Plaintiff did not provide proof of actual sales in this district as required. See id. (remanding with instructions to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction because plaintiff had not provided screenshot evidence of actual sales in Illinois). Accordingly, Plaintiff has not sufficiently alleged that the Court has personal jurisdiction over the Defendant and must file proof of actual sales in Illinois by 11/6/26. Failure to do so will result in the amended complaint being dismissed without prejudice and this case being closed. Mailed notice.