In this case, a parent company and its subsidiary company were named as respondents in discovery in a case pending in Cook County, Illinois. Kanav argued in the motion that the despite the subsidiary company being subject to personal jurisdiction in Illinois, the parent company was devoid of any substantial contacts that would subject it to personal jurisdiction in Illinois.  Plaintiff argued that a respondent in discovery could not bring such a personal jurisdiction motion and that the subsidiary was the alter ego of the parent company.  The Court ruled that a respondent in discovery can bring a personal jurisdiction motion and that the parent company’s involvement in the subsidiary company’s activities did not amount to the subsidiary being an alter ego of the parent company.  Thus, the Court dismissed the parent company as a respondent in discovery.