Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Bounce Curl v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A | Patent Lawsuit 1:26-cv-01880

Bounce Curl, LLC v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A

1:26-cv-01880 N.D. Ill. Closed USD1028527S
Get a prior-art report

Infringement action filed 19 Feb 2026 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois and closed 23 Apr 2026, with USD1028527S asserted. Recorded basis of termination: default judgment.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
USD1028527S
Application no.
US29/880941
Case no.
1:26-cv-01880
Verdict cause
Infringement action
Court
N.D. Ill.
Court level
District Court
Case region
Illinois
Chief judge
Mary M. Rowland
Trial level
First instance
Filed – Closed
19 Feb 2026 – 23 Apr 2026
Duration
63 days
Basis of termination
Default Judgment
Products & marks
Hairbrushes and combs · hair accessories · hair drying · hair styling products · hair vitamins · oils · perfumes · shampoos and conditioners
Validity challenges
None recorded
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 1:26-cv-01880, United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Check this patent against your own product

Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Get an FTO claim chart
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

“This action having been commenced by Plaintiff Bounce Curl, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Bounce Curl”) against the fully interactive, e-commerce stores1 operating under the seller aliases identified on Schedule A attached hereto (collectively, the “Seller Aliases”), and Plaintiff having moved for entry of Default and Default Judgment against the defendants identified on Schedule A (collectively, the “Defaulting Defendants”); This Court having entered upon a showing by Plaintiff a temporary restraining order against Defaulting Defendants which included an asset restraining order; Plaintiff having properly completed service of process on Defaulting Defendants, the combination of providing notice via electronic publication and e-mail, along with any notice that Defaulting Defendants received from payment processors, being notice reasonably calculated under all circumstances to apprise Defaulting Defendants of the pendency of the action and affording them the opportunity to answer and present their objections; and 1 The e-commerce store URLs are listed on Schedule A hereto under the Online Marketplaces. Case: 1:26-cv-01880 Document #: 42 Filed: 04/23/26 Page 1 of 8 PageID #:615 2 Defaulting Defendants having failed to answer the Complaint or otherwise plead, and the time for answering the Complaint having expired; THIS COURT HEREBY FINDS that it has personal jurisdiction over the Defaulting Defendants since the Defaulting Defendants directly target their business activities toward consumers in the United States, including Illinois. Specifically, Defaulting Defendants have targeted sales to Illinois residents by setting up and operating e-commerce stores that target United States consumers using one or more Seller Aliases, offer shipping to the United States, including Illinois, accept payment in U.S. dollars from U.S. consumers, and have sold the same product shown in Exhibit 1 to the Complaint [3], that infringes Plaintiff’s U.S. Patent No. D1,028,527 (the “Infringing Product”). Plaintiff’s U.S. Patent No. D1,028,527 (the “Bounce Curl Design”) is shown in the below chart. Patent Number Claim Issue Date D1,028,527 May 28, 2024 Case: 1:26-cv-01880 Document #: 42 Filed: 04/23/26 Page 2 of 8 PageID #:616 3 Patent Number Claim Issue Date THIS Court further finds that Defaulting Defendants are liable for patent infringement (35 U.S.C. § 271). IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion for Entry of Default and Default Judgment is GRANTED in its entirety, that Defaulting Defendants are deemed in default and that this Final Judgment is entered against Defaulting Defendants. Case: 1:26-cv-01880 Document #: 42 Filed: 04/23/26 Page 3 of 8 PageID #:617 4 IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: 1. Defaulting Defendants, their affiliates, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, confederates, and all persons acting for, with, by, through, under or in active concert with them be permanently enjoined and restrained from: a. offering for sale, selling, and importing Infringing Product; b. aiding, abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in offering for sale, selling, and importing the Infringing Product; and c. effecting assignments or transfers, forming new entities or associations or utilizing any other device for the purpose of circumventing or otherwise avoiding the prohibitions set forth in Subparagraphs (a) and (b). 2. Upon Plaintiff’s request, any third party with actual notice of this Order who is providing services for any of the Defaulting Defendants, or in connection with any of Defaulting Defendants’ Online Marketplaces, including, without limitation, any online marketplace platforms such as PayPal, Inc. (“PayPal”), Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”), WhaleCo Inc. (“Temu”), and Walmart, Inc. (“Walmart”) (collectively, the “Third Party Providers”) shall within seven (7) calendar days after receipt of such notice disable and cease displaying any advertisements used by or associated with Defaulting Defendants in connection with the sale of the Infringing Product. 3. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 289, Plaintiff is awarded profits from each of the Defaulting Defendants for the sale of the Infringing Product sold through at least the Defaulting Defendants’ Seller Aliases according to the below chart: No Defaulting Defendant / Seller Alias Requested Profit Award 1 A3B8XWPGIJSUET $4,326.30 2 caizheng chen $467.72 Case: 1:26-cv-01880 Document #: 42 Filed: 04/23/26 Page 4 of 8 PageID #:618 5 3 CHENFEIQIDNAIAN $1,863.72 4 DONGHAOYI $250 5 Ecosheek $4,653.30 7 FuyingJia $250.00 8 Fxhuarsm $833.13 9 HongYcong $356.62 10 Household goods club $552.77 12 longyanqixiangtongxingongchengy ouxiangongsi $744.84 13 RYZNBY $250.00 14 shenzhenshichenguangshangmao $250.00 15 TANFU $253.00 16 WETBAMBOO $259.35 17 Xiamenxiangzhenghongdianzishang wuyouxiangongsi $250.00 18 xizixiaodian $854.50 19 zhiahe0132 $250.00 21 BestCasesHere $1,531.89 23 EZ LIFES R $519.78 25 Hotsale Case $2,502.95 26 MoGiLi $1,930.42 27 CYLYTSTORE $665.88 4. Plaintiff may serve this Order on Third Party Providers, including PayPal, Amazon, Temu, and Walmart, by e-mail delivery to the e-mail addresses Plaintiff used to serve the Temporary Restraining Order on the Third Party Providers. 5. Any Third Party Providers holding funds for Defaulting Defendants, including PayPal, Amazon, Temu, and Walmart, shall, within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of this Order, permanently restrain and enjoin any financial accounts connected to Defaulting Defendants’ Seller Aliases or Online Marketplaces from transferring or disposing of any funds, up to the above identified damages award, or other of Defaulting Defendants’ assets. 6. All monies (up to the amount of the profit award in Paragraph 3 above) currently restrained in Defaulting Defendants’ financial accounts, including monies held by Third Party Providers are hereby released to Plaintiff as partial payment of the above-identified Case: 1:26-cv-01880 Document #: 42 Filed: 04/23/26 Page 5 of 8 PageID #:619 6 damages, and Third Party Providers, including are ordered to release to Plaintiff the amounts from Defaulting Defendants’ financial accounts within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of this Order. 7. Until Plaintiff has recovered full payment of monies owed to it by any Defaulting Defendant, Plaintiff shall have the ongoing authority to serve this Order on Third Party Providers in the event that any new financial accounts controlled or operated by Defaulting Defendants are identified. Upon receipt of this Order, Third Party Providers shall within seven (7) calendar days: a. locate all accounts and funds connected to Defaulting Defendants’ Seller Aliases and Online Marketplaces, including, but not limited to, any financial accounts connected to the information listed in Schedule A hereto, the e-mail addresses identified in Exhibits to the Declaration of Merian Odesho, and any e-mail addresses provided for Defaulting Defendants by third parties; b. restrain and enjoin such accounts or funds from transferring or disposing of any money or other of Defaulting Defendants’ assets; and c. release all monies, up to the above identified damages award, restrained in Defaulting Defendants’ financial accounts to Plaintiff as partial payment of the above-identified damages within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of this Order. 8. In the event that Plaintiff identifies any additional online marketplaces or financial accounts owned by Defaulting Defendants, Plaintiff may send notice of any supplemental proceeding to Defaulting Defendants by e-mail at the e-mail addresses identified in Exhibits to the Declaration of Merian Odesho and any e-mail addresses provided for Defaulting Defendants by third parties. Case: 1:26-cv-01880 Document #: 42 Filed: 04/23/26 Page 6 of 8 PageID #:620 7 9. The twenty-four thousand dollar ($24,000) surety bond posted by Plaintiff is hereby released to Plaintiff or its counsel, Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. The Clerk of the Court is directed to return the surety bond previously deposited with the Clerk of the Court to Plaintiff or its counsel. This is a Final Judgment.”

Case 1:26-cv-01880 · N.D. Ill. · closed 23 April 2026
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 1:26-cv-01880?

1:26-cv-01880 is a patent infringement action brought by Bounce Curl, LLC against The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, filed on 19 Feb 2026 in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The case closed on 23 April 2026.

Which patent was asserted in 1:26-cv-01880?

USD1028527S (“Hair brush”), assigned to BOUNCE CURL, LLC, currently active. The record also lists Hairbrushes and combs, hair accessories, hair drying, hair styling products, hair vitamins, oils, perfumes and shampoos and conditioners.

How was case 1:26-cv-01880 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is default judgment. The termination text reads: “This action having been commenced by Plaintiff Bounce Curl, LLC (“Plaintiff” or “Bounce Curl”) against the fully interactive, e-commerce stores1 operating under the seller aliases identified on Schedule A attached hereto (collectively, the “Seller Aliases”), and Plaintiff having moved for entry of Default and Default Judgment against the defendants identified on Schedule A (collectively, the “Defaulting Defendants”); This Court having entered upon a showing by Plaintiff a temporary restraining order against Defaulting Defendants which included an asset restraining order; Plaintiff having prop

What does default judgment mean?

A default judgment is entered when a defendant does not appear or does not defend the action.

How long did case 1:26-cv-01880 take?

63 calendar days, from filing on 19 Feb 2026 to closure on 23 April 2026.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 1:26-cv-01880?

Chief Judge Mary M. Rowland presided. Amy Crout Ziegler, Jennifer Van Nacht, Justin R. Gaudio and Justin Tyler Joseph are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Bounce Curl.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 1:26-cv-01880 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 1:26-cv-01880 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.