Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Nautilus v. Vevor Corp — Adjustable Dumbbell Patent Dispute | PatSnap
Patent Litigation

Nautilus v. Vevor Corp: Adjustable Dumbbell Patent Case Stayed After 364 Days

Fitness equipment maker Nautilus filed suit against Vevor Corporation and ten co-defendants in C.D. California, asserting three patents covering adjustable dumbbell technology. After 364 days of litigation, the court stayed all proceedings and removed the case from its active caseload pending a stipulation for dismissal or a new schedule.

Resolution time
364days
364 days from filing to stay — approximately one year of active litigation
Patents asserted
3
US10518123B2, US7614982B2, and US8002680B2 — adjustable dumbbell system patents
Outcome
Case Stayed
Court stayed all deadlines and removed the case from its active caseload
Cost ruling
Not recorded
No cost or fee ruling is reflected in the available record
Published by PatSnap Insights Team · Verified by PatSnap Eureka Data
Case overview

Nautilus asserts three dumbbell patents against Vevor and Shanghai entities

Nautilus initiated this infringement action on June 22, 2022 in the Central District of California, asserting three U.S. patents — US10518123B2, US7614982B2, and US8002680B2 — against Vevor Corporation and a broad group of co-defendants including Vevor, Inc., Sanven Corporation, three Shanghai-based machinery and e-commerce entities, and two named individuals, Fuyu Jiao and Rubao Jiao. The accused products are adjustable dumbbell systems sold under the Vevor brand.

The recorded Basis of Termination is 'Case Stayed.' The docket order, dated June 14, 2023, states that the court, having considered the parties' Joint Stipulation to Stay Case, stayed all deadlines for thirty days up to and including July 14, 2023, removed the case from its active caseload, and ordered the parties to file a stipulation for dismissal or a new proposed schedule by that date.

See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →
Case at a glance
PlaintiffNautilus
CourtCalifornia Central District Court
JudgeN/A
FiledJune 22, 2022
ClosedJune 21, 2023
Duration364 days
OutcomeCase Stayed
Verdict causeInfringement Action
BasisCase Stayed
Prior Art Intelligence
See what prior art exists on this patent.
Eureka scans millions of patents and papers to surface prior art that may have invalidated these claims before costly litigation begins.
Check Prior Art
Case data sourced from PACER / California Central District Court via PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore similar cases ↗
Case timeline

Filing to Case Stayed in 364 days

364 days from filing to stay — approximately one year of active litigation

Case timeline: Complaint filed JUN 22 2022 — 364 days total Horizontal timeline showing the three key events in Nautilus v Vevor Corporation from filing to resolution. Source: PACER, California Central District Court. JUN 22 2022 Complaint filed Pre-trial proceedings JUN 21 2023 Case Stayed 364 DAYS TOTAL
Patent at issue

US10518123B2, US7614982B2 & US8002680B2 — Adjustable Dumbbell Systems

Publication No.US10518123B2
Application No.US14/304853
Patent details
ProductAdjustable dumbbell system — selector and weight stack configuration
Cited in actionJune 22, 2022

Publication No.US7614982B2
Application No.US11/844565
Patent details
ProductAdjustable dumbbell system — locking and adjustment mechanism
Cited in actionJune 22, 2022

Publication No.US8002680B2
Application No.US12/882018
Patent details
ProductAdjustable dumbbell system — cradle and plate retention assembly
Cited in actionJune 22, 2022
Technical brief · sourced from PatSnap patent database
US10518123B2Primary patent
Patent figurePatent figure
Technology summary
The adjustable dumbbell system addresses the inconvenience of traditional dumbbells by allowing precise weight adjustments through a rotating disc mechanism, enabling a wide range of exercises with a single unit.
Representative claim (1 of 8 independent)
1. An adjustable dumbbell system, comprising: a handle assembly; a weight comprising a selection assembly including a selector and a selection member with the selector rotating in a plane of rotation to linearly move the selection member back and forth between a selected position in which the weight is fixedly connected to the handle assembly and an unselected position in which the weight is not fixedly connected to the handle assembly, and the selection member linearly moves along a line of motion not parallel to the plane of rotation; a base; and a plurality of weights supported by the base, the plurality of we…
Technical background
FIELD The present disclosure relates generally to an adjustable dumbbell system, and more specifically to an adjustable dumbbell system that may include add-on weights attachable to opposing ends of the dumbbell. BACKGROUND Dumbbells are widely used exercise devices for providing resistance training in a wide variety of exercises such as bicep curls, bench presses, shoulder presses, triceps extensions, and the like. Due to the number of exercises that may be performed with dumbbells, users often need many different…
Patent family
37 family members across 15 jurisdictions (US, ES, NZ, CN, EP, JP, WO, DK, MX, AU, TW, DE)
PatSnap Eureka · FTO Search Agent
Should you run an FTO against US10518123B2, US7614982B2 and US8002680B2?

Any company developing, importing, or selling adjustable dumbbell systems in the U.S. market should assess freedom-to-operate against all three Nautilus patents. This is particularly urgent for brands sourcing products from Chinese manufacturers, given that the defendant group in this case spans both U.S. distributors and Shanghai-based manufacturing and e-commerce entities. The risk profile is not limited to direct competitors — downstream distributors and platform sellers may also face exposure.

Run FTO in Eureka
Patent data sourced from USPTO via PatSnap Eureka patent database Search patent records in Eureka ↗
Official verdict

Official order — verbatim text

The Court, having read and considered the Joint Stipulation to Stay Case (Doc. 100), STAYS all deadlines in the next thirty (30) days, up to and including July 14, 2023, and REMOVES THE CASE FROM ITS ACTIVE CASELOAD. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the parties file a stipulation for dismissal or a new proposed schedule no later than July 14, 202
Source: PACER Docket, Case 5:22-cv-01020, California Central District Court

The court's order reflects a jointly requested administrative stay rather than a merits ruling. By removing the case from its active caseload and setting a 30-day deadline for dismissal or a new schedule, the order left the substantive infringement claims on all three patents unresolved as of the recorded stay date.

PACER case 5:22-cv-01020 · Public docket record Explore in Eureka ↗

Legal analysis based on PACER docket records for case 5:22-cv-01020 and PatSnap Eureka litigation intelligence Search PatSnap Eureka ↗
Parties and representation

Full party and counsel information

RoleNameTypeDetail
PlaintiffNautilusIndividual/Search in Eureka ↗
DefendantVevor CorporationCompany/Search in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantFuyu JiaoIndividualSearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantRubao JiaoIndividualSearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantShanghai Peixu Machinery Equipment Co., LtdCompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantShanghai Sihao Machinery Equipment Co., LtdCompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantShanghai Sishun E-Commerce Co., Ltd.CompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantVevor, Inc.CompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantJames LiuIndividualSearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantDoesIndividualSearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantShanghai Sishun Machinery Equipment Co., Ltd.CompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantSanven CorporationCompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselKaren LuongAttorneyCounsel for NautilusSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselPaul L. SmelcerAttorneyCounsel for NautilusSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselRudolph A. Telscher , Jr.AttorneyCounsel for NautilusSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselSamantha SweetAttorneyCounsel for NautilusSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff law firmHusch Blackwell LLPLaw FirmRepresenting NautilusSearch in Eureka ↗
Presiding judgeJudge N/AJudgeCalifornia Central District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗
R&D signals

R&D signals in the adjustable dumbbell and fitness equipment IP space

Forward-looking patent intelligence derived from Nautilus's three-patent assertion against Vevor and the broader adjustable fitness equipment technology landscape.

Patent portfolio

Nautilus's adjustable dumbbell patent filing activity

Nautilus has asserted three patents with different application numbers spanning multiple filing periods, suggesting a layered prosecution strategy in adjustable dumbbell mechanics. Monitoring Nautilus's broader portfolio — including continuations, divisionals, and recent applications — can reveal where the company is actively building new IP fences around this product category.

Portfolio depth watch
Technology landscape

Filing trends in adjustable weight selection mechanisms

The adjustable dumbbell category has attracted patent activity around selector mechanisms, weight plate retention, and cradle designs. Tracking global filing trends in this segment — including activity from both established fitness brands and Chinese OEM-linked applicants — can surface emerging design approaches and potential white-space opportunities for differentiation.

Adjustable dumbbell filing trends
Competitor IP posture

Vevor and Shanghai entities' patent activity in fitness equipment

Vevor Corporation and its affiliated Shanghai-based entities — including Peixu, Sihao, and Sishun — operate across manufacturing and e-commerce. Analysing any patent filings or design registrations held by these entities can indicate whether they are developing proprietary IP to defend future product lines or relying on design-around strategies in the adjustable fitness equipment space.

Vevor IP portfolio check
White-space opportunity

Adjacent innovation space near adjustable dumbbell IP

Nautilus's three asserted patents focus on mechanical adjustment and retention systems. Adjacent areas — including digital weight tracking, smart load sensing, connected fitness integration, and ergonomic handle design — may represent lower-encumbrance R&D territory for companies seeking to compete in the adjustable fitness equipment market without infringing the asserted portfolio.

Adjacent fitness IP white space
Related litigation

Similar patent cases in adjustable fitness equipment and consumer goods

Explore related infringement actions in the adjustable fitness equipment space filed in California federal courts, with comparable multi-defendant supply chain structures.

🔍
Access 40+ similar cases in PatSnap Eureka
Nautilus patent enforcement history, California Central District Court case history, Nautilus's full IP portfolio, and comparable case analysis
Nautilus v. other defendantsFitness equipment IP casesC.D. California patent staysChinese OEM supply chain IP
Unlock similar cases in Eureka →
Strategic implications

What this case signals for the fitness equipment IP landscape

A three-patent enforcement action against a multi-entity Chinese supply chain highlights evolving tactics in consumer fitness IP.

Multi-entity enforcement is now standard in consumer fitness IP disputes

Nautilus named ten defendants spanning U.S. distributors, Chinese manufacturers, e-commerce entities, and named individuals. This layered defendant strategy — targeting the full supply chain — suggests the plaintiff sought to close off multiple avenues of continued sales and distribution simultaneously.

Three-patent assertion increases claim breadth and settlement leverage

Asserting US10518123B2, US7614982B2, and US8002680B2 together across adjustable dumbbell system technology signals a portfolio enforcement approach. Competing product teams operating in the adjustable dumbbell space should evaluate all three patents when conducting freedom-to-operate analysis.

🔒
Full strategic analysis in PatSnap Eureka
Unlock full strategic analysis for this fitness equipment case in C.D. California, including portfolio risk and FTO signals.
Supply chain IP riskPortfolio continuation watchFTO gap analysis
Unlock full analysis →
Analysis powered by PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore in Eureka ↗
Frequently asked questions

Nautilus v Vevor — key questions answered

Still have questions? PatSnap Eureka can answer them instantly from patent and litigation data. Ask Eureka ↗
PatSnap Eureka

Monitor Nautilus's dumbbell patent portfolio before your next product launch

PatSnap Eureka tracks continuation filings and claim scope changes across Nautilus's adjustable dumbbell IP stack. Run a structured FTO against all three asserted patents to de-risk sourcing and product development decisions.

Disclaimer

This page is compiled from public court dockets and third-party patent and litigation data via PatSnap Eureka, and is provided for general informational purposes only. The information shown — including party names, patent and application numbers, dates, case status, outcomes, and any analysis — may be incomplete, may not reflect the most recent filings or legal status, and may contain errors or omissions. Verify all details against official court records (for example, PACER) and the relevant patent office before relying on them.

Nothing on this page constitutes legal advice or a legal opinion on the validity, infringement, enforceability, or scope of any patent or case, and no attorney‑client relationship is created by its use. Any description of an outcome (such as a dismissal, settlement, or consent judgment) is a general summary, not a legal determination. All patents, trademarks, and company or law‑firm names are the property of their respective owners. PatSnap makes no warranty as to the accuracy or completeness of this content and disclaims, to the fullest extent permitted by law, all liability for reliance on it. For advice on a specific matter, consult qualified legal counsel.

Ask anything about this case.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.
Powered by PatSnap Eureka
Link copied to clipboard

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.