Express Parts & Crisol Technology v. BHRS Group: Water Filter Patent Case Paused for Settlement
Express Parts LLC and Crisol Technology Hong Kong Limited sued BHRS Group LLC in New Jersey federal court for infringing US11123667B2 through the sale of water filter cartridges on Amazon. After 571 days of litigation, the court administratively terminated the action in October 2025 at the parties’ joint request — signalling active settlement negotiations.
Amazon-listed water filter patent dispute paused mid-litigation for settlement
Filed on March 15, 2024 in the District of New Jersey, this infringement action was brought by Express Parts LLC and Crisol Technology Hong Kong Limited against BHRS Group LLC. The plaintiffs alleged that BHRS Group infringed US11123667B2 — a patent covering water filter cartridge technology — through products sold on Amazon.com under ASIN B0C374WCS1. The case was handled by plaintiff-side firms Baldassare & Mara LLC and Wang Gao & Associates PC, with Lombard & Geliebter LLP appearing for the defendant.
On October 3, 2025, the parties submitted a joint letter requesting administrative termination of the action while settlement discussions continued. The court granted the request on October 7, 2025, explicitly noting that the termination order does not constitute a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. This distinction is significant: the case remains alive on the docket and any party may petition to reopen it. A telephonic status conference was scheduled for December 8, 2025, suggesting the court intends to monitor progress.
The 571-day duration before reaching this procedural pause suggests the parties engaged substantively before pivoting toward resolution. The joint nature of the request and the explicit carve-out from Rule 41 are consistent with a situation where settlement terms are close but not yet finalised. The public record does not disclose the nature of any proposed settlement, any royalty terms, or whether a licence is contemplated — outcomes that will likely only become visible if the case is reopened or a formal dismissal order is eventually filed.
Filing to Case Terminated in 571 days
571 days from filing to administrative termination — longer than the median D.N.J. patent case first year
Full party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | EXPRESS PARTS LLC | Company | IP licensing and technology commercialisation — holder of US11123667B2 (water filter cartridges)Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | CRISOL TECHNOLOGY HONG KONG LIMITED | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | BHRS Group,LLC | Company | BHRS Group LLC — seller of water filter cartridges on Amazon.com (ASIN B0C374WCS1)Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Heng Wang | Attorney | Counsel for EXPRESS PARTS LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jennifer Mara | Attorney | Counsel for EXPRESS PARTS LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Baldassare & Mara LLC | Law Firm | Representing EXPRESS PARTS LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Wang Gao & Associates, PC | Law Firm | Representing EXPRESS PARTS LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Darren M. Geliebter | Attorney | Counsel for BHRS Group,LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Lombard & Geliebter LLP | Law Firm | Representing BHRS Group,LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | New Jersey District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s October 7, 2025 order is explicitly procedural: it administratively terminates the action at the parties’ joint request while settlement negotiations continue, and expressly states that the termination does not constitute a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. This means no merits determination has been made on infringement, validity, or damages. The case remains live — either party may seek reinstatement. The scheduled December 2025 status conference suggests judicial oversight of the settlement timeline will continue.
US11123667B2 — Water Filter Cartridge Technology
US11123667B2 (application number US16/004584) is a granted US utility patent covering water filter cartridge technology. The patent is asserted in the context of consumer-facing replacement filter cartridges sold through e-commerce channels. The application number sequence suggests filing in the mid-to-late 2010s timeframe, with the B2 grant designation indicating it issued with or after an examiner amendment. The patent is co-owned or co-licensed by Express Parts LLC and Crisol Technology Hong Kong Limited, a cross-jurisdictional ownership structure that is common in consumer goods IP portfolios with manufacturing origins in Asia.
Water filtration is a high-volume, replacement-cycle consumer goods category with significant e-commerce sales activity. Patent protection over cartridge designs, filter media configurations, or fitting mechanisms can confer meaningful competitive advantage by blocking compatible or generic alternatives. The assertion of this patent against an Amazon marketplace seller — identified by specific ASIN — is consistent with an enforcement strategy targeting third-party sellers of compatible replacement cartridges, a commercially sensitive area where brand owners and patent holders frequently clash over compatibility claims and interoperability.
Should you run an FTO check against US11123667B2?
Any company manufacturing, importing, or selling water filter cartridges — particularly replacement or compatible cartridges distributed via Amazon or other e-commerce platforms — should treat US11123667B2 as an active enforcement risk. The plaintiffs’ willingness to litigate for over 571 days before pursuing settlement suggests a credible enforcement posture. R&D and product teams launching new SKUs in this category, especially those targeting OEM-compatible filter markets, should conduct freedom-to-operate analysis before listing products.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim language of US11123667B2 against your product specifications, identify potential design-around pathways, and surface any continuation or related applications in the same family that may extend the IP perimeter. Given the co-ownership structure across US and Hong Kong entities, Eureka can also help identify the full scope of the portfolio held by Express Parts LLC and Crisol Technology to assess whether additional patents in the family pose parallel risk.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11123667B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar water filter cartridge patent cases in US District Courts
Explore related patent infringement actions involving water filtration technology and e-commerce product sales litigated in US federal district courts.
What this case signals for the water filtration IP landscape
Patent enforcement against Amazon marketplace sellers is intensifying. This case illustrates how ASIN-specific targeting is becoming a litigation tool.
ASIN-level patent enforcement is a growing Amazon marketplace risk
Plaintiffs cited a specific Amazon ASIN in their infringement claims, a tactic increasingly used to tie product listings directly to patent assertions. Sellers operating across multiple ASINs in the water filtration category should audit their listings against relevant patents before enforcement letters arrive.
Administrative termination signals settlement proximity — not case closure
The court’s explicit exclusion of Rule 41 from this termination order means the case is suspended, not resolved. IP professionals monitoring this dispute should watch for either a formal voluntary dismissal — indicating a deal was struck — or a motion to reopen, suggesting talks broke down.
EXPRESS v BHRS — key questions answered
As of October 7, 2025, the case has been administratively terminated by the District of New Jersey at the parties’ joint request. The termination is not a Rule 41 dismissal — the case remains live and may be reopened. A status conference was scheduled for December 8, 2025 to assess settlement progress.
The patent at issue is US11123667B2 (application US16/004584), a US utility patent covering water filter cartridge technology. The defendant allegedly infringed this patent by selling products on Amazon.com under ASIN B0C374WCS1.
No. The court’s order expressly states it does not constitute a dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41. Administrative termination is a procedural mechanism that suspends active docket management while settlement discussions continue. Either party can move to reopen the case at any time.
The plaintiffs are Express Parts LLC and Crisol Technology Hong Kong Limited. Both are listed as parties to the infringement action, suggesting joint ownership or co-exclusive licensing of US11123667B2. This cross-jurisdictional structure is relevant to any licensing or settlement negotiations and the scope of any IP releases that may be granted.
The parties were ordered to appear for a telephonic status conference on December 8, 2025, with status letters due one week prior. If settlement is reached, a voluntary dismissal order under Rule 41 would formally close the case. If talks fail, either party may file a letter requesting reinstatement to the active docket.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.