Deckers Outdoor v. Schedule A Defendants: UGG Design Patent Dismissed With Prejudice
Deckers Outdoor Corporation, maker of UGG footwear, filed suit in the Northern District of Illinois asserting design patent USD927161S against a group of anonymous online defendants. The action was voluntarily dismissed with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1) after just 87 days — a resolution timeline consistent with early settlement or enforcement leverage achieved outside the courtroom.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 87 days
87 days — resolved significantly faster than the median N.D. Ill. patent case
Dismissed with prejudice: what Deckers’ Rule 41 filing means for both sides
Rule 41(a)(1) dismissal with prejudice — a permanent end to this claim
A voluntary dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1) is filed by the plaintiff without requiring court approval. The ‘with prejudice’ designation is the critical qualifier: Deckers permanently waives the right to re-assert USD927161S against these specific defendants on these specific claims. No court ever ruled on the merits of infringement or validity.
Plaintiff-initiated, permanent barDeckers forecloses re-litigation — suggesting leverage was achieved
By dismissing with prejudice rather than without, Deckers signalled that the commercial objective of the lawsuit — typically cessation of infringing sales and, in Schedule A cases, asset freezes or settlements — was likely achieved. The trade-off is that Deckers cannot revive these specific claims against these named defendants. This pattern is common in brand-enforcement sweeps targeting counterfeit or infringing online sellers.
Objective likely achieved pre-trialAnonymous defendants released — but the precedent is one-sided
The Schedule A defendants — typically anonymous e-commerce storefronts — are released from this specific action. However, a with-prejudice dismissal does not prevent Deckers from filing new suits against the same parties on different patents, different products, or different acts of infringement occurring after the dismissal date. No invalidity finding was made, leaving USD927161S fully enforceable.
Released, patent validity intactUGG design IP remains enforced — Schedule A tactics signal ongoing vigilance
This case is consistent with Deckers’ broader strategy of using Schedule A complaints in N.D. Ill. to enforce footwear design rights against infringing online marketplaces. A swift with-prejudice dismissal typically suggests TRO-backed asset freezes or takedown compliance were secured. Competitors and marketplace sellers should treat USD927161S as actively patrolled IP with a demonstrated willingness to litigate.
Active enforcement postureFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Deckers Outdoor Corp. | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Amy Crout Ziegler | Attorney | Counsel for Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Justin R. Gaudio | Attorney | Counsel for Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Justin Tyler Joseph | Attorney | Counsel for Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Thomas Joseph Juettner | Attorney | Counsel for Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. | Law Firm | Representing Deckers Outdoor Corp.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Matthew F. Kennelly | Judge | Illinois Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The dismissal was filed by Deckers pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1), with prejudice, as to the Schedule A defendants. The with-prejudice designation is legally significant: it bars Deckers from re-filing the same claims against the same parties, but contains no admission of invalidity or non-infringement. For the defendants, the action is terminated; for the market, USD927161S remains valid and uncontested.
USD927161S — UGG Footwear Ornamental Design Patent
USD927161S (application number US29/712480) is a U.S. design patent protecting the ornamental appearance of a specific UGG footwear design held by Deckers Outdoor Corporation. Design patents protect the visual, non-functional characteristics of a product as depicted in the patent drawings. The scope of protection is defined by the solid lines in the figures, making the exact silhouette, surface texture, and proportions legally significant.
For Deckers, design patents like USD927161S are central to protecting the distinctive aesthetic identity of the UGG brand against copycat products sold through online marketplaces. In the e-commerce enforcement context, a single design patent can be deployed across dozens of defendants simultaneously via Schedule A complaints — amplifying the commercial return on a single IP asset and deterring counterfeit listing activity at scale.
Should you run an FTO against USD927161S?
Any company designing, manufacturing, or selling footwear with aesthetic similarities to UGG-style boots or slippers — particularly those selling through Amazon, Alibaba, Wish, or similar platforms — should assess clearance against USD927161S. Deckers has demonstrated a willingness to file in N.D. Ill. and pursue TROs rapidly. The risk is not only litigation cost but immediate account and payment freezes before a defendant can respond.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map your product’s ornamental features against the figures of USD927161S, identify the claimed design boundaries, and surface any prior art that could support an invalidity argument. Eureka also monitors new Deckers filings and related design patent families, giving your legal and product teams early warning of enforcement activity before it reaches your storefront.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on USD0927161S to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Design Patent Schedule A Cases in N.D. Illinois
Browse comparable footwear and fashion design patent Schedule A enforcement actions filed in the Northern District of Illinois against anonymous online defendants.
What this case signals for the footwear design IP landscape
Deckers’ rapid Schedule A filing and with-prejudice dismissal reflects a disciplined, repeatable enforcement model targeting online design infringement.
Schedule A filings are a scalable enforcement tool for design patent holders
By consolidating anonymous defendants into a single ‘Schedule A’ complaint, Deckers can obtain TROs, asset freezes, and platform takedowns efficiently. The 87-day lifecycle of this case suggests the operational objectives were met without proceeding to discovery or trial — a cost-effective outcome for the brand.
With-prejudice dismissal preserves the patent’s enforceability against others
USD927161S emerges from this case with no adverse validity ruling. Any e-commerce seller, manufacturer, or brand operating in the UGG-adjacent footwear space should treat this design patent as enforceable and actively monitored. Deckers’ track record in N.D. Ill. suggests repeated use of this litigation pathway.
Deckers v Partnerships — key questions answered
Deckers voluntarily dismissed the action with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1), permanently barring re-filing of the same claims against the same defendants. No court ruled on infringement or validity. USD927161S remains enforceable against other parties, and the dismissal is consistent with Deckers having achieved its enforcement objectives — likely through TRO compliance or settlement.
USD927161S (application US29/712480) is a U.S. design patent held by Deckers Outdoor Corporation protecting the ornamental appearance of a UGG footwear design. Design patents cover the non-functional visual characteristics of a product as depicted in patent drawings. Protection is limited to the specific aesthetic shown; functional features are not protected.
The defendants are identified only as ‘Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A’ — a standard placeholder used in N.D. Ill. e-commerce enforcement cases. These typically refer to anonymous online sellers operating through third-party marketplaces. The full Schedule A list is often filed under seal or attached separately to the complaint.
N.D. Ill. is a preferred venue for Schedule A design patent enforcement actions because its judges have experience with the procedural framework, and courts there have been willing to grant ex parte TROs and asset freezes against anonymous online defendants. This enables patent holders like Deckers to freeze defendant funds held by payment processors before defendants are formally served.
The with-prejudice dismissal bars Deckers from re-filing the same claims under USD927161S against the specific named defendants for the specific conduct at issue. However, Deckers could potentially file new actions against the same parties based on different patents, different products, or new infringing acts occurring after the dismissal date. The dismissal does not constitute a global release.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.