Casio Computer Co., Ltd. V. The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, And Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A Hereto

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: The plaintiff's motion for expedited discovery 14 is granted. Further, the Clerk is directed to unseal the plaintiff's filings 8 16 17 18 19. Plaintiff did not request leave to file most of these documents under seal, and the grant of the original motion to file under seal 7 was based on the representation that a TRO was forthcoming ("Plaintiff is requesting temporary ex parte relief.") Where, as here, the plaintiff seeks expedited discovery rather than a TRO, the Court finds no basis to permit the case to proceed under seal, particularly given that the discovery process will require disclosure of the defendants' identities. Enter order. Mailed notice

MINUTE entry before the Honorable John J. Tharp, Jr: By 10/20/2026, the plaintiff is required to file (1) a listing of all prior online trademark, copyright, or patent infringement cases (also known as "Schedule A" cases) filed in any court in the United States in which it was a plaintiff, and (2) a listing of any of the defendants included in the Schedule A in this case that the plaintiff has previously named as a defendant in any prior complaint or Schedule A case. The motion for leave to file documents under seal 7 is granted. The sealed Schedule A attached to the Complaint and Exhibit 3 to the Declaration of Jay Paragoso may be maintained under seal until the defendants are served, at which time they will be unsealed. Plaintiff is advised any motion for TRO must be accompanied by proof that sales actually took place in Illinois. See Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090, 1093 (7th Cir. 2026). Records consisting of screenshots of the website of an e-commerce platform, such as Amazon, showing the checkout page with the infringing product, an Illinois shipping address, and the estimated total, are insufficient to show a completed purchase in Illinois. The plaintiff must also include (1) a certification that the plaintiff has not used any of the screenshot evidence supplied in support of its motion in any prior proceeding, and (2) an index that matches each defendant to the screenshots supplied in support of the motion, lists the dates those screenshots were taken, and identifies, on a defendant-by-defendant basis, the specific trademarks each defendant has allegedly infringed. Mailed notice