Design Patent Dismissed: Chen v. Schedule A Sellers Mobile AC Case
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
📋 Case Summary
| Case Name | Zhaoyou Chen v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A |
| Case Number | 1:24-cv-07164 (N.D. Ill.) |
| Court | Northern District of Illinois |
| Duration | Aug 2024 – Jun 2025 ~10 months |
| Outcome | Plaintiff Loss – Dismissed With Prejudice |
| Patent at Issue | |
| Accused Products | Mobile Air Conditioning Kit |
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
Individual patent holder who asserted rights in a design patent covering a mobile air conditioning kit.
🛡️ Defendants
Dozens of online marketplace sellers accused of selling allegedly infringing mobile air conditioning kits through third-party platforms.
The Patent at Issue
This case centered on a single design patent covering the ornamental design of a mobile air conditioning kit:
- • US D941,982 S — Ornamental design for a mobile air conditioning kit
Launching a new product?
Conduct FTO analysis before finalizing your product design in competitive categories.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
The case was **dismissed with prejudice for want of prosecution** on March 27, 2025 (ECF 145). This followed the vacatur of a preliminary injunction against 12 defendants on January 8, 2025, and the forfeiture of a $10,000 TRO bond to defense counsel, represented by Gottesman Legal PLLC.
Verdict Cause Analysis
The vacatur of the preliminary injunction suggested the court found the plaintiff failed to satisfy one or more parts of the preliminary injunction standard. The subsequent dismissal for want of prosecution indicates Chen or counsel failed to diligently pursue the case after the initial injunction setback, a pattern not uncommon in mass Schedule A cases.
Filing a design patent?
Learn from this case. Use AI to draft stronger claims that can withstand litigation.
Power Your Patent Strategy with Eureka IP
From novelty searches to patent drafting, Eureka’s AI-powered tools help you navigate the patent landscape with confidence.
⚠️ Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in marketplace enforcement. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- View all related Schedule A enforcement trends
- See which firms are active in multi-defendant litigation
- Understand procedural pitfalls in mass enforcement
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
Design patents in mobile AC kits
1 Involved Patent
Design patent USD941982S
Key Learning
Diligence critical for plaintiffs
✅ Key Takeaways
For Patent Attorneys
Want-of-prosecution dismissals with prejudice permanently extinguish claims — rigorous docket management is essential in high-volume Schedule A cases.
Explore procedural best practices →Preliminary injunction vacaturs signal early merit weaknesses; evaluate case viability before committing to full litigation.
Search related court opinions →For IP Professionals & R&D Teams
Conduct FTO analysis covering design patents in mobile climate control and consumer electronics categories before product launch.
Start FTO analysis for my product →Marketplace sellers should monitor Schedule A litigation filings; early retention of counsel dramatically improves outcomes.
Learn about Schedule A defense →Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join thousands of IP professionals using Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyze competitive landscapes.