This is a single-defendant case but the complaint reads a lot like a #ScheduleA case.
September 25, 2026 at 12:36 PM
This is a single-defendant case but the complaint reads a lot like a #ScheduleA case.
But the plaintiffs themselves are asking to deviate from the normal rules & procedures. The entire #ScheduleA model is built on such deviations. But it's always "deviation for me and not for thee": The defendants are held to the normal rules. Now, the plaintiffs want to constrain the judges?
September 21, 2026 at 1:00 PM
But the plaintiffs themselves are asking to deviate from the normal rules & procedures. The entire #ScheduleA model is built on such deviations. But it's always "deviation for me and not for thee": The defendants are held to the normal rules. Now, the plaintiffs want to constrain the judges?
Huuuhhhei, se oli hauskaa pitkästä aikaa! Oikein mukavaa olla takasisin ainakin jotenkin (ei ole tiettyä schedulea, koska striimailen vaan tilanteen mukaan) Huomenna olisi kuitenkin tarkoitus jatkaa joskus 14-16 välillä
Mitäpä jos yritetään tänään saada striimi aikaseksi n.15-16 välillä🤔
Pelinä on Metro 2033 redux, josko tämän avulla sais vihdoin sen striimin aikaseksi ja pääsisi eroon paineesta😅
Ei luultavasti kovin pitkä mutta ainakin jotain
Pelinä on Metro 2033 redux, josko tämän avulla sais vihdoin sen striimin aikaseksi ja pääsisi eroon paineesta😅
Ei luultavasti kovin pitkä mutta ainakin jotain
January 14, 2026 at 6:07 PM
Huuuhhhei, se oli hauskaa pitkästä aikaa! Oikein mukavaa olla takasisin ainakin jotenkin (ei ole tiettyä schedulea, koska striimailen vaan tilanteen mukaan) Huomenna olisi kuitenkin tarkoitus jatkaa joskus 14-16 välillä
This is the same panel that heard the #ScheduleA appeal yesterday: HARDIMAN, BIBAS, RENDELL
September 17, 2026 at 1:35 PM
This is the same panel that heard the #ScheduleA appeal yesterday: HARDIMAN, BIBAS, RENDELL
One judge asks about the #ScheduleA standing orders. Stanley doesn't answer.
September 16, 2026 at 2:11 PM
One judge asks about the #ScheduleA standing orders. Stanley doesn't answer.
I write and think a lot about design patents, including how they are being monetized using the #ScheduleA litigation model.
You can download my articles here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/...
For more on design patents, see, e.g., papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
For more on #ScheduleA, see:
You can download my articles here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/...
For more on design patents, see, e.g., papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
For more on #ScheduleA, see:
The Counterfeit Sham
There’s a new front in the IP rhetoric wars. Plaintiffs in “Schedule A” cases tell judges that they need to secretly seize the assets of hundreds of defendants
papers.ssrn.com
September 8, 2026 at 1:47 PM
I write and think a lot about design patents, including how they are being monetized using the #ScheduleA litigation model.
You can download my articles here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/...
For more on design patents, see, e.g., papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
For more on #ScheduleA, see:
You can download my articles here: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/cf_dev/...
For more on design patents, see, e.g., papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers....
For more on #ScheduleA, see:
You are the freaking best. I still laugh about some post about no eating oranges because of the official orange opening moving schedulea
September 10, 2025 at 2:43 AM
You are the freaking best. I still laugh about some post about no eating oranges because of the official orange opening moving schedulea
It's interesting to me how #ScheduleA plaintiffs' counsel in Chicago don't seem to file appeals while our friend Stanley seems to appeal all the time.
This is, by the way, another case out of the WDPA, filed (and appealed) by the same attorney who filed (and appealed) the Jacki Easlick case:
#ScheduleA at the Third Circuit:
Promier Products Inc v. Gearoz, No. 25-02407 (3d Cir. Aug 07, 2025) is scheduled to be argue today at 9:30 Eastern.
In this case, the plaintiff alleges false advertising (an issue that seems extremely ill-suited for ex parte adjudication):
Promier Products Inc v. Gearoz, No. 25-02407 (3d Cir. Aug 07, 2025) is scheduled to be argue today at 9:30 Eastern.
In this case, the plaintiff alleges false advertising (an issue that seems extremely ill-suited for ex parte adjudication):
September 16, 2026 at 1:50 PM
It's interesting to me how #ScheduleA plaintiffs' counsel in Chicago don't seem to file appeals while our friend Stanley seems to appeal all the time.
#ScheduleA at the Third Circuit:
Promier Products Inc v. Gearoz, No. 25-02407 (3d Cir. Aug 07, 2025) is scheduled to be argue today at 9:30 Eastern.
In this case, the plaintiff alleges false advertising (an issue that seems extremely ill-suited for ex parte adjudication):
Promier Products Inc v. Gearoz, No. 25-02407 (3d Cir. Aug 07, 2025) is scheduled to be argue today at 9:30 Eastern.
In this case, the plaintiff alleges false advertising (an issue that seems extremely ill-suited for ex parte adjudication):
September 16, 2026 at 12:43 PM
#ScheduleA at the Third Circuit:
Promier Products Inc v. Gearoz, No. 25-02407 (3d Cir. Aug 07, 2025) is scheduled to be argue today at 9:30 Eastern.
In this case, the plaintiff alleges false advertising (an issue that seems extremely ill-suited for ex parte adjudication):
Promier Products Inc v. Gearoz, No. 25-02407 (3d Cir. Aug 07, 2025) is scheduled to be argue today at 9:30 Eastern.
In this case, the plaintiff alleges false advertising (an issue that seems extremely ill-suited for ex parte adjudication):
"an electronic service that - the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of the service is to enable online social interaction between 2 or more end-users"
Emailing someone about their life experience is a SOCIAL INTERACTION!
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
Emailing someone about their life experience is a SOCIAL INTERACTION!
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
ParlInfo - Schedule 1—Amendments
Search engine for Australian parliamentary documents and media.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au
November 25, 2024 at 3:00 AM
"an electronic service that - the sole purpose, or a significant purpose, of the service is to enable online social interaction between 2 or more end-users"
Emailing someone about their life experience is a SOCIAL INTERACTION!
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
Emailing someone about their life experience is a SOCIAL INTERACTION!
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
The Migration Amendment Bill passed last month grants the government authority to bribe third countries to accept refugees deported from Australia.
Australia: making the whole world our detention centre
Australia: making the whole world our detention centre
ParlInfo - Schedule 5—Spending authority for third country reception
arrangements
Search engine for Australian parliamentary documents and media.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au
December 9, 2024 at 6:10 AM
The Migration Amendment Bill passed last month grants the government authority to bribe third countries to accept refugees deported from Australia.
Australia: making the whole world our detention centre
Australia: making the whole world our detention centre
#ScheduleA x personal jurisdiction in McCarthy:
"Merely offering on-line sales with shipping to the U.S. was not enough."
McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 32:45.50 (5th ed.) (citing Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090, 1093 (7th Cir. 2026)).
"Merely offering on-line sales with shipping to the U.S. was not enough."
McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 32:45.50 (5th ed.) (citing Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090, 1093 (7th Cir. 2026)).
![The Seventh Circuit said that the key question to ask is whether defendant in its internet activities had “targeted” the forum state. The court said that neither interactivity nor sending e-mails into state were by themselves sufficient: “‘[O]ur inquiry boils down to this: has [defendant] purposefully exploited the [Indiana] market’ beyond simply operating an interactive website accessible in the forum state and sending emails to people who may happen to live there?”41 That court later said that there can be no personal jurisdiction in Illinois over an internet store offering infringing goods unless Illinois residents have actually purchased the goods. Merely offering on-line sales with shipping to the U.S. was not enough](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:hvwhptk4oerwsuzau66ikwfy/bafkreidr3nzelyoeoxqagkq2pz5d43ogerjyc36k6ekvyzh3hvsrccicce)
September 21, 2026 at 12:50 PM
#ScheduleA x personal jurisdiction in McCarthy:
"Merely offering on-line sales with shipping to the U.S. was not enough."
McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 32:45.50 (5th ed.) (citing Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090, 1093 (7th Cir. 2026)).
"Merely offering on-line sales with shipping to the U.S. was not enough."
McCarthy on Trademarks and Unfair Competition § 32:45.50 (5th ed.) (citing Liu v. Monthly, 170 F.4th 1090, 1093 (7th Cir. 2026)).
Plaintiffs in #ScheduleA cases often invoke the language of counterfeiting--even when no actual counterfeiting is at issue.
The Counterfeit Sham Harvard Law Review
Abstract There’s a new front in the IP rhetoric wars. Plaintiffs in “Schedule A” cases tell judges that they need to secretly seize the...
harvardlawreview.org
September 17, 2026 at 1:40 PM
Plaintiffs in #ScheduleA cases often invoke the language of counterfeiting--even when no actual counterfeiting is at issue.
I was joking obviously haha. No way they gonna delay it. The release schedulea for September and Oct itself are signaling that something big is coming. And rest assure the bigger studios did communicate together to avoid release interference. So that's basically what we are seeing haha.
June 3, 2026 at 9:30 PM
I was joking obviously haha. No way they gonna delay it. The release schedulea for September and Oct itself are signaling that something big is coming. And rest assure the bigger studios did communicate together to avoid release interference. So that's basically what we are seeing haha.
Person to person email still counts:
63C 1) a) i) enable online social interaction between _2_ or more end-users.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
63C 1) a) i) enable online social interaction between _2_ or more end-users.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
ParlInfo - Schedule 1—Amendments
Search engine for Australian parliamentary documents and media.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au
November 25, 2024 at 3:01 AM
Person to person email still counts:
63C 1) a) i) enable online social interaction between _2_ or more end-users.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
63C 1) a) i) enable online social interaction between _2_ or more end-users.
parlinfo.aph.gov.au/parlInfo/sea...
If you're not familiar: www.cafc.uscourts.gov/08-17-2026-2...
Full disclosure: I was one of the law profs who filed the amicus brief informing the court of various problems with the #ScheduleA format.
Full disclosure: I was one of the law profs who filed the amicus brief informing the court of various problems with the #ScheduleA format.
24-1538: JACKI EASLICK, LLC v. CJ EMERALD [ERRATA], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
ERRATA Posted: JACKI EASLICK, LLC v. CJ EMERALD [ERRATA](pdf) Appeal Number: 24-1538 Origin: DCT Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders.
www.cafc.uscourts.gov
September 16, 2026 at 12:44 PM
If you're not familiar: www.cafc.uscourts.gov/08-17-2026-2...
Full disclosure: I was one of the law profs who filed the amicus brief informing the court of various problems with the #ScheduleA format.
Full disclosure: I was one of the law profs who filed the amicus brief informing the court of various problems with the #ScheduleA format.
Oral argument has been scheduled for Friday, 11/9 in adidas v. localityi. com, No. 25-12597 (11th Cir.).
Argument will be held in Miami.
This is the #ScheduleA appeal involving the question of whether email service on Chinese defendants is allowed under the Hague Service Convention.
Argument will be held in Miami.
This is the #ScheduleA appeal involving the question of whether email service on Chinese defendants is allowed under the Hague Service Convention.
September 15, 2026 at 10:33 PM
Oral argument has been scheduled for Friday, 11/9 in adidas v. localityi. com, No. 25-12597 (11th Cir.).
Argument will be held in Miami.
This is the #ScheduleA appeal involving the question of whether email service on Chinese defendants is allowed under the Hague Service Convention.
Argument will be held in Miami.
This is the #ScheduleA appeal involving the question of whether email service on Chinese defendants is allowed under the Hague Service Convention.
In the 7th Circuit, a #ScheduleA plaintiff can manufacture personal jurisdiction in Chicago by doing test buys.
Here, the court said that was not enough, citing Third Circuit precedent.
Here, the court said that was not enough, citing Third Circuit precedent.
![However, the only evidence offered in support of these sales are Declarations from Plaintiff’s counsel providing that counsel themselves purchased products from each Further, attached to these Declarations are screenshots of receipts for purchase. Id. While the Declarations detail that these purchases were shipped to Pennsylvania, the receipts for purchase have all identifying information removed, including the shipping address. Therefore, it appears likely to this Court that these screenshots were produced by Plaintiff or counsel for purposes of establishing jurisdiction. Such a practice is insufficient to establish personal jurisdiction:
Moreover, the screenshots attached to the complaint do not reflect that these are arms-length sales. If [plaintiff] or its counsel or agents simply ordered these products to create personal jurisdiction, that doesn’t work. See Nifty Home Prods. Inc. v. Ladynana US, No. 23-1332, 2024 WL 4987245, at *3 (3d Cir. Dec. 5, 2024)](https://cdn.bsky.app/img/feed_thumbnail/plain/did:plc:hvwhptk4oerwsuzau66ikwfy/bafkreihtgguweddobwxk54h4q4klw2qutfwfkkxx73roldxo5ytxmch6sm)
September 16, 2026 at 12:50 PM
In the 7th Circuit, a #ScheduleA plaintiff can manufacture personal jurisdiction in Chicago by doing test buys.
Here, the court said that was not enough, citing Third Circuit precedent.
Here, the court said that was not enough, citing Third Circuit precedent.