R Corp. v. P’ships & Unincorporated Ass’ns Identified in Schedule A, Case No. 1:25-cv-06337 (N.D. Ill. June 9, 2025)
The Northern District of Illinois (“NDIL”) has been a hotbed for “Schedule A” litigation—a legal tactic often used by intellectual property (“IP”) owners to crack down on online counterfeiters by filing a single complaint against sometimes hundreds of alleged defendants. NDIL Judge John Kness, however, recently stayed dozens of Schedule A cases while the court considers whether Schedule A litigation is an appropriate procedure and an exercise of sound judicial discretion. He joins other NDIL judges who sua sponte have dismissed cases for improper joinder or who have issued orders requiring plaintiffs to demonstrate proper joinder.
With increasing frequency, IP owners have used Schedule A litigation to enforce IP rights against online sellers. Sellers, often operating under aliases, sell counterfeit goods on online marketplaces and e-commerce platforms such as Amazon or eBay, disappear before they can be tracked down and legal action can commence, and resurface under new aliases. Instead of naming individual sellers as defendants, plaintiffs file with their complaints a sealed “Schedule A” often listing hundreds of alleged infringers. Plaintiffs then seek ex parte temporary restraining orders (“TROs”), which courts often grant, and serve the TROs on the e-commerce platforms to freeze the sellers’ assets and halt sales on the e-commerce platform before the sellers are aware they have been sued.
