Brunner and Fry v. Fenix, where the procedure stands

The docket for Brunner v. Fenix Internet LLC, case 1:25-cv-03244 in the Northern District of Illinois, was read on the CourtListener mirror on 2026-09-17. It gives the filing date as 26 March 2025, the assigned judge as John F. Kness, the cause as diversity, other contract, and the date of last known filing as 22 October 2025. There is no termination date.

The last entry, document 55 of 22 October 2025, is described only as "Order on Motion to Stay". Its text is not on the mirror: the RECAP archive returns no file for it, and the document is listed as available on PACER only. The desk therefore cannot say whether the stay was granted or denied, and does not guess.

What led there is on the record. The defendants moved to stay on 2 June 2025 as document 31. Briefing closed on 17 June 2025. A minute entry of 14 July 2025 said the motion was fully briefed and would be addressed by separate order. A minute entry of 17 July 2025 records an in-person status hearing held after a hearing in the related case 23-cv-6151, and states that if the stay is denied, any motions to dismiss are due 28 days after the order on the stay.

The mirror itself was last refreshed on 27 November 2025. Any docket activity after that date would not appear on the page the desk read. The related case, McFadden v. Fenix Internet LLC, was dismissed on forum non conveniens grounds on 29 September 2025, a ruling that some coverage has wrongly attributed to Brunner.

Nothing in the complaint has been proved. The two rulings on the record, in the related case and on where the dispute may be heard, are set out in the investigation Brunner and Fry v. Fenix: what the class action says.