Electrasense Technologies v. Schedule A Defendants — Voluntary Dismissal After 154 Days
Electrasense Technologies, LLC asserted US9812876B2 — a patent covering a wall socket with integrated load-detecting circuit — against a group of unnamed e-commerce defendants in the Northern District of Illinois. The case closed after 154 days when Electrasense voluntarily dismissed at least one defendant without prejudice before any answer was filed.
Schedule A smart-socket suit exits before first answer filed
On 4 October 2024, Electrasense Technologies, LLC filed a patent infringement action in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, assigned to Judge Manish S. Shah under Case No. 1:24-cv-09499. The plaintiff asserted US9812876B2, which protects a wall socket incorporating a load-detecting circuit — a component central to smart-outlet and energy-monitoring consumer products. The defendants were identified collectively as ‘The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations identified in Schedule A,’ a litigation format commonly used in e-commerce enforcement campaigns targeting online marketplace sellers.
The case closed on 7 March 2025 when Electrasense filed a notice of voluntary dismissal pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) with respect to at least one named defendant, Rongdaxing Tech (Store Id: A3JTVHR8WNORWA). The notice expressly stated the dismissal was without prejudice as to that defendant, and was filed before the defendant served an answer or motion for summary judgment — the procedural window in which Rule 41(a)(1) dismissals are available as of right. The broader disposition of all Schedule A defendants is not confirmed in the available public record.
A resolution after roughly five months, before any substantive pleadings from the defense, is consistent with the typical arc of Schedule A enforcement actions, which frequently settle or are dismissed quietly once individual defendants are identified and contacted. Whether Electrasense reached private settlements with some defendants, whether defendants delisted the accused products, or whether enforcement simply proved impractical cannot be determined from the public docket alone. The case nonetheless signals active assertion of the ‘876 patent in the smart-socket and load-monitoring technology space.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 154 days
154 days — relatively short for a Schedule A infringement campaign in N.D. Ill.
Voluntarily dismissed: what the Rule 41 filing means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i): dismissal as of right before answer
Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i) permits a plaintiff to dismiss an action without a court order at any time before the defendant serves an answer or a motion for summary judgment. Electrasense exercised this right with respect to Rongdaxing Tech. The procedural posture — no answer on file — made this a unilateral plaintiff decision requiring no judicial approval.
No court order requiredRecord confirms ‘without prejudice’ for Rongdaxing Tech
The filed notice expressly states the dismissal is WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Rongdaxing Tech. A without-prejudice dismissal means Electrasense retains the right to refile claims against that defendant on the same patent. By contrast, a with-prejudice dismissal would bar refiling. For other Schedule A defendants, the public record is silent on specific dismissal terms, so no inference should be drawn.
Refiling remains possibleRongdaxing Tech exits — but faces potential re-assertion
Because the dismissal was without prejudice, Rongdaxing Tech faces no res judicata bar. The defendant incurred no judgment, no injunction, and no damages award. However, the absence of a merits ruling means the ‘876 patent has not been tested for validity or infringement in this action. Rongdaxing Tech and similar sellers should treat the threat as ongoing rather than resolved.
No merits ruling on patentSmart-outlet sellers remain exposed to ‘876 patent risk
The voluntary dismissal without prejudice does not extinguish the ‘876 patent or narrow its claims. E-commerce sellers of wall sockets with load-detecting or energy-monitoring circuits remain potential targets. The Schedule A format signals a systematic enforcement programme — sellers should assess whether their products fall within the claims of US9812876B2 before assuming the matter is closed.
Ongoing FTO risk for smart outletsFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Electrasense Technologies, LLC | Company | Smart power-outlet IP licensor — holder of US9812876B2 (wall socket with load-detecting circuit)Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations identified in Schedule A | Individual | Unnamed e-commerce marketplace sellers of wall sockets/smart outlets listed in Schedule ASearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | David Randolph Bennett | Attorney | Counsel for Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Hao Ni | Attorney | Counsel for Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Nicholas Edward Najera | Attorney | Counsel for Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Steven G. Kalberg | Attorney | Counsel for Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Stevenson Moore | Attorney | Counsel for Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Direction IP Law | Law Firm | Representing Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Ni Law Firm PLLC | Law Firm | Representing Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Ni, Wang & Massand, PLLC | Law Firm | Representing Electrasense Technologies, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Manish S. Shah | Judge | Illinois Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The dismissal notice invokes Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), which is a plaintiff’s unilateral right — not a court-ordered disposition. The express ‘WITHOUT PREJUDICE’ designation for Rongdaxing Tech is legally significant: it preserves Electrasense’s cause of action and prevents any argument of claim preclusion in a future proceeding. No merits findings — on infringement, validity, or claim construction — were made. The patent emerges from this case legally unimpaired.
US9812876B2 — Wall Socket with Load-Detecting Circuit
US9812876B2 (application number US15/000049) protects a wall socket design that integrates a load-detecting circuit, enabling the outlet to sense and respond to electrical load conditions. This class of invention sits at the intersection of consumer electrical hardware and smart-home energy management — covering the embedded intelligence within a standard power outlet that allows it to monitor, report, or respond to connected device loads. The patent was granted by the USPTO and carries a presumption of validity in any U.S. enforcement proceeding.
Load-detecting wall sockets are a high-volume consumer product category dominated by Chinese manufacturers and sold extensively through Amazon and other global e-commerce platforms. The ‘876 patent’s claims, if broadly construed, could implicate a wide range of smart-outlet SKUs beyond the specific accused products in this case. For any company designing, importing, or distributing wall sockets with embedded load-sensing, energy-monitoring, or smart-switching functionality in the U.S. market, this patent represents an active enforcement risk that warrants independent claim analysis.
Should your product team run an FTO against US9812876B2?
Any company selling or importing wall sockets, smart plugs, or power strips that incorporate load-detecting, energy-monitoring, or load-responsive circuitry for the U.S. market should assess freedom to operate against US9812876B2. The Electrasense enforcement action demonstrates the patent is being actively asserted, and the without-prejudice dismissal confirms the owner has not retired its claims. This is particularly relevant for Amazon marketplace sellers, consumer electronics importers, and OEMs supplying smart-home device brands.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can generate a structured claim-chart comparison between the independent claims of US9812876B2 and your product’s technical architecture in minutes. Eureka surfaces relevant prior art, identifies prosecution history estoppel, and flags similar asserted patents in the smart-outlet and consumer power category — giving your IP and R&D teams the evidence base needed to make an informed go/no-go decision before U.S. market entry or product launch.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US9812876B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Schedule A Smart-Outlet Patent Cases in N.D. Illinois
Explore comparable Schedule A e-commerce patent enforcement actions involving smart-socket and load-monitoring technology filed in the Northern District of Illinois.
What this case signals for the smart-outlet IP enforcement landscape
Schedule A enforcement of smart-socket patents is active in N.D. Ill. — sellers and competitors should take note.
Schedule A actions move fast — identify your exposure before you are listed
Electrasense’s campaign reached at least one identified marketplace seller within the first months of filing. E-commerce vendors of smart sockets, load-monitoring outlets, or related consumer power devices should proactively map their products against US9812876B2 claims rather than wait for a summons.
Without-prejudice dismissal is not a clean exit for defendants
A Rule 41(a)(1) without-prejudice dismissal leaves the patent fully intact and the plaintiff free to refile. Rongdaxing Tech and any co-defendants dismissed on similar terms remain litigation targets. Private settlement is the more durable resolution — a dismissal notice alone is not equivalent to a licence or covenant not to sue.
Electrasense v Partnerships — key questions answered
The case was voluntarily dismissed. Electrasense filed a Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) notice of voluntary dismissal without prejudice as to defendant Rongdaxing Tech before that defendant filed an answer. The case closed on 7 March 2025 after 154 days. The dismissal was without prejudice, meaning Electrasense retains the right to refile against the same defendant.
Electrasense asserted US9812876B2, filed under application number US15/000049. The patent protects a wall socket incorporating a load-detecting circuit — technology relevant to smart outlets, energy-monitoring power sockets, and similar consumer electrical products. The patent carries a full presumption of validity as no invalidity findings were made in this case.
A without-prejudice dismissal means the claims were dropped without any adjudication on the merits. Rongdaxing Tech faces no judgment, damages, or injunction arising from this action. However, Electrasense is not barred from refiling infringement claims against Rongdaxing Tech on the same patent in the future. The dismissal is not equivalent to a licence or release.
The case caption names defendants collectively as ‘The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations identified in Schedule A’ — a common format in e-commerce enforcement actions targeting multiple online marketplace sellers simultaneously. The public record identifies Rongdaxing Tech (Amazon Store Id: A3JTVHR8WNORWA) as one specifically named defendant. The identities of all Schedule A defendants are typically filed under seal or via sealed exhibit.
US9812876B2 covers a wall socket with a load-detecting circuit, which overlaps with a broad category of smart-outlet and energy-monitoring consumer products. Active enforcement in this case suggests Electrasense is pursuing an assertion strategy targeting e-commerce sellers. Companies importing, distributing, or selling such products in the U.S. should conduct a freedom-to-operate analysis against the ‘876 patent’s independent claims before or during U.S. market activity.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.