Also: The issue is not that "injunction restraints" are "impeding" these cases. The issue is that #ScheduleA plaintiffs are asking for remedies that they are not entitled to.
This week in #ScheduleA: - Wood v. Eiazuiks, No. 25-02340 (3d Cir.), has been calendared for argument on Friday, 5/15, in Philadelphia. - The appellees have filed their brief in PROMIER PRODUCTS INC. v. GEAROZ (3d Cir.) - New appeal: Zhang v. Schedule A, No. 26-01539 (Fed. Cir. Mar 19, 2026).
In this piece, I identify and analyze two new forms of judge shopping I've observed in #ScheduleA cases in the Northern District of Illinois. I analogize these tactics to certain forms of cheating at roulette—namely, “pinching” and “pressing” bets.
This new #ScheduleNay litigation model (working title) puts a lot of pressure on the rules and norms around fair notice. In both these cases and #ScheduleA cases, the judges often approve alternative service of process. Namely, service by email to whatever address is on file with the platforms.
If only for my own shorthand/convenience, I need to come up with a name for this new litigation format Deckers is using. It's not #ScheduleA litigation; there's no separate defendant list and they don't do the cash grab until after the defendants default. But the targets & justifications are similar
So this decision isn't about #ScheduleA but this part seems relevant:

RE: https://bsky.app/profile/did:plc:hvwhptk4oerwsuzau66ikwfy/post/3mi23gmqf2227
Hey, look, a #ScheduleA case with pictures! Unfortunately for this defendant, this accused product does not infringe this design patent. Not even close. Ma v. Schedule A, No. 1:26-cv-21949 (S.D. Fla. Mar 24, 2026).
More #ScheduleA in the Third (yes, THIRD) Circuit: The appellees have filed their brief in PROMIER PRODUCTS INC. v. GEAROZ et al, Docket No. 2:25-cv-00497 (W.D. Pa. Apr 15, 2025).
#ScheduleA in the Third (yes, THIRD) Circuit: Wood v. Eiazuiks, No. 25-02340 (3d Cir. Jul 21, 2025), has been calendared for argument on Friday, 5/15, in Philadelphia.