UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.6.3

Eastern Division

TikTok, Inc., Consumer Privacy Litigation, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04699

Honorable John Z. Lee

TikTok Inc., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, August 22, 2022:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee:Litteken's counsel's motion to

vacate the preliminary injunction contained in the Court's scheduling order [165][166] is

denied. In order to challenge the injunction, Edelson must be a class member, who is

aggrieved by the injunction. See Douglas v. W. Union Co., 955 F.3d 662, 665 (7th Cir.

2020). Edelson cannot establish either prerequisite. First, Edelson has not shown that it is

a member of the Nationwide Class or the Illinois Subclass. Edelson alleges that "it has

used the TikTok App to share videos as part of its social media outreach," Mot. Vacate

Prelim. Inj. at 2, ECF No. 166, but it has not provided any evidence for this claim, such as

a username, video links, or dates of its alleged use, or even an affidavit stating that it has

used the App. See Mullins v. Direct Digit., LLC, 795 F.3d 654, 66869 (7th Cir. 2015)

(plaintiff has the burden of establishing class membership, which can be met by affidavit);

Boundas v. Abercrombie & Fitch Stores, Inc., 280 F.R.D. 408, 41718 (N.D. Ill. 2012)

(requiring either documentary evidence or an affidavit to establish class membership).

Second, the injunction does not bar Edelson's participation in the arbitration at issue. By

its plain terms, the injunction only prevents Class Members from involvement in litigation

"relating to or arising out of the claims and causes of action or the facts and circumstances

giving rise to the Action and/or the Released Claims." Order Granting Prelim. Approval

21, ECF No. 162 (emphasis added). This language is naturally read to bar only claims that

concern alleged data privacy violations stemming from use of the App. See In re Nat'l

Football League Players' Concussion Inj. Litig., 301 F.R.D. 191, 204 (E.D. Pa. 2014)

(stating that the purpose of an anti−suit injunction in MDL settlement proceedings is to

prevent "parallel litigation in other fora" that "presents a genuine threat to the jurisdiction

of the federal court" and may endanger the settlement (emphasis added) (quoting In re

Diet Drugs, 282 F.3d 220, 235 (3d Cir. 2002))). From the parties' description of the

arbitration proceedings that prompted Edelson to file this motion, it is clear that the

arbitration dispute presents no "genuine threat" to the Court's jurisdiction over this case.

Id. Furthermore, in light of the Court's previous order [233], Movant Christina

Travis's motion for leave to file under seal [222] is granted.(ca, )

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 263 Filed: 08/22/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:13148
ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 263 Filed: 08/22/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:13149