Jetteo LLC v. Schedule A Defendants: Default Judgment in 58 Days for Sandwich Maker Patent
Jetteo LLC, holder of US11490647B2 covering a crustless sealed sandwich maker, secured a default judgment and permanent injunction against ten online marketplace sellers in the Northern District of Illinois. The court ordered all frozen account assets — totalling just $137.52 — transferred to Jetteo within 58 days of filing.
Schedule A Enforcement: Swift Default Against Online Marketplace Sellers
On 18 September 2024, Jetteo LLC — represented by Avek IP LLC — filed suit in the Northern District of Illinois against a group of online marketplace sellers operating under names including ‘this*is*a*lucky*store’, Darsun, HiYZ, Hidden Gems Haven, and others listed on a Schedule A. The claim asserted infringement of US11490647B2, a patent covering a device for making crustless sealed sandwiches, through sales on platforms including Amazon, eBay, AliExpress, Temu, and Walmart.
With no defendants entering an appearance or filing responsive pleadings, Jetteo moved for default and default judgment. Judge Georgia N. Alexakis granted the motion in its entirety on 15 November 2024, issuing a permanent injunction barring defendants from making, selling, or importing the infringing products and ordering all frozen assets — estimated at $137.52 across all defaulting defendants — released to Jetteo. Third-party platforms including Amazon, PayPal, and Alibaba were directed to comply within seven calendar days.
The 58-day resolution is consistent with the accelerated timeline typical of Schedule A cases in the Northern District of Illinois, where plaintiffs routinely obtain ex parte temporary restraining orders and asset freezes before defendants are formally served. The minimal damages award of $137.52 suggests defendants had negligible frozen account balances at the time of the TRO — a common outcome where sellers may have already withdrawn funds or operated thin-margin storefronts. The public record does not disclose whether any defendants were subsequently located or whether the injunction has been enforced against platform accounts.
Filing to Default Judgment in 58 days
58 days from filing to final judgment — well below the district average for default proceedings
Default judgment granted: injunction, asset transfer, and platform enforcement
Default judgment under Federal Rules: no defence filed
When a defendant fails to plead or otherwise defend, a plaintiff may move for default judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55. The court takes the complaint’s well-pleaded allegations as admitted, meaning patent infringement was accepted without contest. The judgment here is final and immediately enforceable, including against third-party platforms holding defendants’ funds.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 defaultPermanent injunction secured; asset recovery limited to $137.52
Jetteo obtains a permanent injunction — the primary commercial objective in Schedule A actions — preventing continued sales of the infringing sandwich maker across major e-commerce platforms. However, the $137.52 damages recovery suggests defendants’ frozen accounts contained minimal balances, which is typical where sellers operated briefly or had already cleared their platform wallets before the TRO took effect.
Injunction + nominal damagesAll defaulting defendants permanently enjoined; accounts seized
By failing to respond, all ten named defendants are permanently barred from selling, importing, or assisting in the sale of the infringing products in the US. Their frozen financial accounts on Amazon Pay, PayPal, eBay, Alibaba, and Walmart were ordered released to Jetteo. Defendants are also prohibited from forming new entities to circumvent the injunction — a standard anti-evasion provision in Schedule A orders.
Permanent injunction; accounts forfeitedPlatform enforcement extends liability to Amazon, Temu, and others
The order explicitly directs major online marketplaces — including Amazon, eBay, AliExpress, Alibaba, Temu, Walmart, and Target — to disable seller accounts and release frozen funds. This multi-platform enforcement model is characteristic of Northern District of Illinois Schedule A litigation and signals to other marketplace sellers of crustless sandwich makers that IP holders can rapidly freeze listings and accounts with limited upfront cost.
Multi-platform enforcement modelFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Jetteo, LLC | Company | Consumer kitchenware IP licensor — holder of US11490647B2, crustless sandwich maker patentSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | auli_97 | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | The Partnerships And Unincorporated Associations Identified On Schedule A, | Individual | Ten online marketplace sellers across Amazon, eBay, Temu, and AliExpress storefrontsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | *this*is*a*lucky*store* | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Avraham Netanel d/b/a netaneavraham | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | delightfuldiscoveriesco | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Dov Dor d/b/a Hidden Gems Haven | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | fuqingshiruijiahemaoyiyouxiangongsi d/b/a Darsun | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | sayed khalaf d/b/a STORE-B2C | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | ShenZhenShiJiaYingMeiKeJiYouXianGongSi d/b/a HiYZ | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | stuffamdtech | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | this*is*a*lucky*store | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Top Smart d/b/a top-smart95 | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Allen Justin Poplin | Attorney | Counsel for Jetteo, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Wangxue Deng | Attorney | Counsel for Jetteo, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Avek IP LLC | Law Firm | Representing Jetteo, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Georgia N Alexakis | Judge | Illinois Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s order is comprehensive in scope, combining a permanent injunction, multi-platform enforcement directives, and a damages award under 35 U.S.C. § 284. Because the judgment was entered on default, the infringement allegations in the complaint were deemed admitted — no claim construction or validity analysis was conducted. The nominal $137.52 recovery reflects frozen account balances at the time of the TRO, not an assessed royalty or lost profits figure. The platform-directed enforcement provisions are immediately operative, requiring Amazon, PayPal, eBay, and others to act within seven calendar days.
US11490647B2 — Crustless sealed sandwich maker device
US11490647B2 covers a sandwich maker specifically designed to produce crustless, sealed sandwiches — a product category that includes consumer kitchen gadgets used to press, seal, and trim bread edges in a single operation. The patent’s application number (US16/746689) suggests a filing in the 2020 timeframe, placing it in a period of growing e-commerce interest in novelty kitchen tools. The ‘B2’ designation confirms it issued after examination with substantive prosecution history.
In the consumer kitchenware segment, design-adjacent utility patents on compact food preparation devices can provide meaningful enforcement leverage, particularly against low-cost overseas sellers on marketplace platforms. US11490647B2 is strategically positioned to block a category of products frequently replicated by generic manufacturers. For competitors or platform sellers in the sandwich maker or food sealing device space, the patent’s claim scope is directly relevant — any device that seals and trims a sandwich in a single motion warrants FTO review.
Should your team run an FTO against US11490647B2?
Any company designing, importing, or retailing a crustless sandwich maker, sandwich sealing press, or similar bread-crimping kitchen device for the US market should treat US11490647B2 as a live enforcement risk. Jetteo has demonstrated both the willingness and the legal infrastructure — via Avek IP LLC and Schedule A proceedings — to move swiftly against online sellers. A proactive FTO review is particularly urgent for Amazon, Temu, eBay, and AliExpress sellers operating in this product category.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the independent and dependent claims of US11490647B2 against your product’s technical specifications, flag prior art that may support invalidity arguments, and identify related patents in Jetteo’s portfolio or adjacent IP held by competitors. For product and R&D teams developing kitchen sealing devices, Eureka can also surface design-around pathways — helping teams document non-infringement before launch rather than after a TRO.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11490647B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar Schedule A patent cases in the Northern District of Illinois
Explore related patent infringement cases targeting online marketplace sellers in the N.D. Illinois — the dominant venue for Schedule A consumer product enforcement actions.
What this case signals for the consumer kitchenware IP enforcement landscape
Schedule A litigation in the Northern District of Illinois remains a sharp and low-cost tool for patent holders targeting e-commerce infringers.
Asset freezes often outpace fund recovery in Schedule A actions
The $137.52 damages award illustrates a recurring tension in Schedule A patent cases: courts grant asset freezes early, but by the time judgment is entered, defendants’ platform accounts may already be near-empty. Patent holders prioritising deterrence and injunctive relief over monetary recovery are best positioned for this enforcement model.
Permanent injunctions carry value beyond the named defendants
The anti-evasion clause — prohibiting new entity formation to circumvent the order — and the direct platform notification mechanism means the injunction has reach beyond the ten named sellers. Any related storefront or successor account is at risk of being swept in, giving Jetteo ongoing enforcement leverage on Amazon, Temu, and other major marketplaces.
Jetteo v Partnerships — key questions answered
Jetteo LLC asserted US11490647B2, a utility patent covering a sandwich maker for making crustless sealed sandwiches. The patent was asserted against ten online marketplace sellers operating on platforms including Amazon, eBay, Temu, AliExpress, and Walmart in the Northern District of Illinois.
Judge Georgia N. Alexakis granted Jetteo’s motion for default and default judgment in its entirety on 15 November 2024. The court issued a permanent injunction against all defaulting defendants and ordered their frozen financial accounts — totalling $137.52 — transferred to Jetteo within 58 days of the case being filed.
The court awarded damages of $137.52 under 35 U.S.C. § 284 — the total balance of frozen assets held across the defaulting defendants’ platform accounts at the time of judgment. This nominal figure is consistent with Schedule A cases where sellers have already withdrawn funds prior to the asset freeze taking effect.
The judgment named Amazon, eBay, AliExpress, Alibaba, Temu, Walmart, Target, PayPal, Alipay, and Ant Financial as third-party providers required to disable seller accounts and release frozen funds to Jetteo. Platforms were given seven calendar days from receipt of the order to comply.
Schedule A cases are patent (or trademark) infringement actions filed against multiple anonymous online sellers, identified on an exhibit (‘Schedule A’) rather than individually named in the complaint. The Northern District of Illinois has become the dominant venue for these actions due to its receptiveness to ex parte temporary restraining orders, asset freezes, and expedited default procedures — making it favourable for IP holders targeting e-commerce infringers with limited identifying information.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.