Chubby Gorilla v. Schedule A Defendants: Default Judgment on Unicorn Bottle Design Patents
Chubby Gorilla, Inc. secured a court-ordered default judgment in 105 days against overseas e-commerce sellers counterfeiting its Unicorn-branded cylindrical squeeze bottle, asserting four US design patents and distinctive trade dress. The court enjoined Alibaba, PayPal, Stripe, and other payment processors from releasing defendants’ frozen funds and ordered those funds transferred directly to Chubby Gorilla.
Chubby Gorilla’s Unicorn bottle wins swift default judgment against counterfeit marketplace sellers
Filed 18 December 2024 in the Northern District of Illinois before Judge Sara L. Ellis, this action saw Chubby Gorilla, Inc. target an unnamed cohort of e-commerce sellers — identified only as the Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations in Schedule A — alleged to have sold counterfeit versions of its Unicorn-branded cylindrical squeeze bottle through Alibaba-hosted storefronts. The plaintiff asserted four US design patents (D991,037; D999,637; D907,500; D908,500) and distinctive Unicorn trade dress comprising a cylindrical bottle with a concavely tapering cap that closely matches the bottle’s diameter.
The case closed on 2 April 2025 via a default judgment after defendants failed to answer or appear despite service by electronic publication and email — a service method the court accepted as constitutionally adequate given the defendants’ anonymous online presence. Judge Ellis found willful design patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271, willful trade dress infringement and false designation of origin under 15 U.S.C. § 1125, and violations of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act. The judgment granted a permanent injunction, ordered Alibaba, PayPal, Stripe, LianLian, and Payoneer to freeze and transfer defendants’ account balances to Chubby Gorilla, with a minimum floor of $250 per defendant.
The 105-day cradle-to-judgment timeline is consistent with the expedited Schedule A playbook common in the Northern District of Illinois, where brand owners routinely obtain TROs and asset freezes before defendants can dissipate funds. What remains unknown from the public record is the aggregate number of Schedule A defendants, the total monetary recovery, and whether any defendants subsequently moved to vacate the default — a not-uncommon follow-on step in these mass-defendant actions.
Filing to Default Judgment in 105 days
105-day resolution — faster than the median Schedule A default action in N.D. Illinois
Default judgment entered: what the ruling means for both parties
Default judgment: allegations admitted by defendants’ silence
A default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 is entered when defendants fail to answer or appear. The court treats all well-pleaded allegations in the complaint as admitted. Here, the defendants’ non-appearance meant the court accepted Chubby Gorilla’s evidence of willful infringement without adversarial challenge, allowing the case to conclude in just 105 days from filing.
FRCP 55 — uncontested on the meritsChubby Gorilla secures injunction, asset freeze, and damages floor
The judgment delivers Chubby Gorilla a permanent injunction, immediate access to defendants’ frozen payment accounts (Alibaba, PayPal, Stripe, LianLian, Payoneer), and a damages floor of $250 per defendant under 35 U.S.C. § 289. The court also preserved Chubby Gorilla’s right to launch supplemental enforcement proceedings if additional accounts are identified — extending the practical reach of this single judgment.
Permanent injunction + asset recoveryDefaulting defendants face frozen funds and permanent ban on infringing sales
Defendants who failed to appear now face a permanent injunction, confiscation of their e-commerce account balances, and a ban on selling any product not colorably different from the Unicorn bottle. Any defendant wishing to contest the judgment must move to vacate under FRCP 55(c) and 60(b), demonstrating excusable neglect and a meritorious defence — a high bar after a willful infringement finding.
FRCP 60(b) motion required to contestSchedule A precedent reinforces platform-level accountability for counterfeit bottle sellers
The order’s direct targeting of Alibaba, Alipay, PayPal, Stripe, LianLian, and Payoneer signals that payment infrastructure operators remain central enforcement targets in US design patent counterfeiting cases. For legitimate competitors in the squeeze-bottle and vape-accessories market, this judgment clarifies that Chubby Gorilla’s Unicorn bottle design is actively enforced, raising the risk profile for any similar product geometry entering the US market.
Platform enforcement — payment processor liabilityFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Chubby Gorilla, Inc. | Company | Vape and squeeze bottle brand — holder of US D991,037, D999,637, D907,500, D908,500Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified in Schedule A | Individual | Anonymous Alibaba e-commerce sellers alleged to counterfeit Chubby Gorilla’s Unicorn bottleSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Brian P. O’Donnell | Attorney | Counsel for Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | James Edward Judge | Attorney | Counsel for Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Marko Romeo Zoretic | Attorney | Counsel for Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Ying Chen | Attorney | Counsel for Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Zareefa Burki Flener | Attorney | Counsel for Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Flener IP & Business Law | Law Firm | Representing Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear Llp | Law Firm | Representing Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP | Law Firm | Representing Chubby Gorilla, Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Sara L. Ellis | Judge | Illinois Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The default judgment is comprehensive in scope: the court found willful infringement under both patent and Lanham Act theories without adversarial presentation, meaning no defendant argued claim scope, invalidity, or non-infringement. The willfulness finding is significant — while not triggering enhanced damages here (§ 289 profits were awarded instead), it forecloses any future argument that the infringement was innocent. The injunction extends to third-party platform operators, which is the operative enforcement mechanism given the defendants’ anonymity.
US D991,037; D999,637; D907,500; D908,500 — Unicorn cylindrical squeeze bottle design
The four asserted design patents — US D991,037, D999,637, D907,500, and D908,500 — protect ornamental aspects of Chubby Gorilla’s Unicorn cylindrical squeeze bottle, a product widely used in the vape accessories and e-liquid market for dispensing liquids. Design patents under 35 U.S.C. § 171 protect the novel ornamental appearance of an article, not its functional utility. The application numbers suggest these patents were filed across two prosecution campaigns (29/610633 and 29/614048 in one cluster; 29/765561 and 29/765567 in a second), consistent with a portfolio strategy protecting both the bottle body and its distinctive cap geometry.
The Unicorn bottle’s distinctive silhouette — a smooth cylindrical body capped by a narrowing, concave-tapered top — has become strongly associated with Chubby Gorilla in the e-liquid accessories market. Four overlapping design patents make design-around difficult without departing substantially from the recognisable form. For any competitor producing dropper or squeeze bottles in a similar size category, these patents represent a meaningful clearance risk, particularly given Chubby Gorilla’s demonstrated willingness to pursue Schedule A mass-defendant enforcement through the Northern District of Illinois.
Should you run an FTO against Chubby Gorilla’s Unicorn bottle design patents?
Any manufacturer, importer, or retailer of cylindrical squeeze bottles, dropper bottles, or e-liquid dispensing containers with a concave-tapering cap should assess clearance risk against US D991,037, D999,637, D907,500, and D908,500. This is especially relevant for products sold through Alibaba, Amazon, or other US-facing e-commerce platforms — the precise channels Chubby Gorilla has already targeted. The default judgment demonstrates that even passive platform participation can trigger injunctions and asset freezes.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim scope of all four Chubby Gorilla design patents against your product geometry, identify prior art that could support an invalidity argument, and flag related pending applications in the same family. With four patents in play and active enforcement already underway, a structured FTO analysis is the minimum prudent step before commercialising any visually similar bottle design in the US market.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on USD0908500S to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Schedule A design patent cases in the Northern District of Illinois
Explore comparable N.D. Illinois Schedule A enforcement actions involving design patents and trade dress on consumer product packaging.
Related patent case — similar technology
Comparable case in the same technology domain. Patent holder and defendant reached resolution after proceedings.
SettledRelated infringement action — same court
Comparable Unicorn Trade Dress (a cylindrical bottle with a cap, where the cap has a cylindrical portion having a diameter substantially similar to the bottle and a smooth portion that concavely tapers toward a flat top-adjacent infringement action. Patent enforcement dynamics analysed in depth.
Active · District CourtRelated invalidity challenge — appellate outcome
Combined invalidity and infringement action in the same technology space. Decided after substantive proceedings.
DecidedChubby Gorilla, Inc.’s broader IP enforcement history
Chubby Gorilla, Inc.’s full litigation history covering prior enforcement, licensing activity, and inter partes review proceedings.
Portfolio viewWhat this case signals for the consumer bottle design IP landscape
Chubby Gorilla’s rapid default judgment illustrates how design patent portfolios can be weaponised against anonymous online counterfeiters at scale.
Multiple design patents create overlapping protection for a single product geometry
Chubby Gorilla asserted four design patents covering different aspects of the same Unicorn bottle. This layered approach makes it harder for counterfeiters to design around any single patent while maintaining a visually similar product. IP teams in consumer packaging should audit whether their hero SKUs carry comparable multi-patent coverage.
Asset freezes are the real enforcement lever in Schedule A cases
The TRO-to-asset-freeze sequence, executed before defendants could respond, effectively transferred financial leverage to Chubby Gorilla within weeks of filing. In-house teams considering anti-counterfeiting strategy should treat payment-processor cooperation — Alibaba, PayPal, Stripe — as a core tactic rather than an afterthought.
Trade dress plus design patents: why stacking IP claims matters in e-commerce enforcement
The court sustained both design patent and Lanham Act trade dress claims simultaneously. This dual-track approach increases the chances of prevailing on at least one theory and enables broader injunctive relief. Brands with distinctive packaging geometry should evaluate whether their product shapes qualify for trade dress registration independent of design patent coverage.
Electronic service precedent lowers the barrier for future anti-counterfeiting campaigns
Judge Ellis accepted email plus e-commerce platform notification as constitutionally adequate service — a ruling that may be cited in future N.D. Illinois Schedule A actions. Plaintiffs targeting anonymous overseas sellers should document their e-commerce service attempts meticulously to secure the same procedural advantage.
Chubby v Partnerships — key questions answered
Chubby Gorilla asserted four US design patents: D991,037, D999,637, D907,500, and D908,500, all covering ornamental aspects of its Unicorn cylindrical squeeze bottle. The company also asserted its Unicorn Trade Dress, defined as a cylindrical bottle with a cap having a diameter substantially similar to the bottle body and a smooth portion that concavely tapers toward a flat top.
The Northern District of Illinois entered a default judgment in Chubby Gorilla’s favour on 2 April 2025. The court found willful design patent infringement, willful trade dress infringement, false designation of origin, and violation of the Illinois Uniform Deceptive Trade Practices Act. A permanent injunction was granted, and defendants’ accounts held by Alibaba, PayPal, Stripe, LianLian, and Payoneer were ordered released to Chubby Gorilla.
The court accepted service by electronic publication and email as constitutionally adequate, consistent with due process standards for anonymous overseas e-commerce defendants. The court found this method was reasonably calculated to apprise defendants of the action, supplemented by any notices defendants may have received directly from e-commerce platforms and payment processors.
The court awarded profits under 35 U.S.C. § 289, calculated as at least the remaining funds in each defaulting defendant’s financial accounts, with a minimum floor of $250 per defendant. Defendants’ accounts held by Alibaba, Alipay, PayPal, Stripe, LianLian, and Payoneer were ordered transferred to Chubby Gorilla within 14 calendar days of the order.
A defendant wishing to contest the judgment must move to vacate under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure 55(c) and 60(b), demonstrating good cause and a meritorious defence. The willful infringement finding makes this procedurally difficult. Any such motion would need to be filed promptly, as delay can independently bar relief under Rule 60(b)’s reasonable-time requirement.
Protect your bottle designs before the next Schedule A wave
Use PatSnap Eureka to run an FTO against Chubby Gorilla’s four Unicorn bottle design patents and monitor new enforcement filings in the Northern District of Illinois. Early clearance analysis is significantly cheaper than defending an asset-freeze TRO.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.