NOCO Co. v. Shenzhenshi Daosishangmao — Battery Jump Starter Patent Case Stayed
NOCO Co. filed suit in the Southern District of Texas against three defendants over five patents covering portable vehicle battery jump starters. The case was stayed in its entirety after just 85 days, pending resolution of parallel proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission.
Five jump-starter patents, three defendants, one ITC stay
On 14 February 2023, NOCO Co. filed an infringement action in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Case No. 4:23-cv-00554), before Judge Lee H. Rosenthal. NOCO asserted five U.S. patents — US10328808B2, US11254213B2, US9770992B2, US11447023B2, and US10981452B2 — covering portable vehicle battery jump starters with safety protection and battery cell equalization circuitry. The defendants were Chinese entity Shenzhenshi Daosishangmao Youxiangongsi and U.S.-based distributors Ace Farmer LLC and Metasee LLC.
The recorded basis of termination is 'Case Stayed.' The docket order states that the court granted Metasee LLC's and Ace Farmer LLC's motion to stay the case pending resolution of related proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission. The case is stayed in its entirety, all current deadlines are vacated, and the parties are required to file a joint notice within 14 days of the ITC proceedings' resolution, including a proposal for how the district court case should proceed.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Case Stayed in 85 days
Case resolved to stay in 85 days — well under the median district court patent case timeline.
US10328808B2 — Portable vehicle battery jump starter with cell equalization circuit
Any company manufacturing, importing, or distributing portable vehicle battery jump starters in the U.S. market should treat this litigation as a direct prompt for FTO analysis. NOCO has asserted five patents covering battery cell equalization circuits and safety protection features — two elements that are architecturally common across this product category. U.S. resellers of Chinese-manufactured jump starters face particular exposure, as this case demonstrates that distributor-level defendants are squarely within NOCO's enforcement scope.
Official order — verbatim text
The court's order staying this case in its entirety reflects the established principle that district courts have discretion to defer to parallel ITC proceedings involving overlapping patents and accused products. No merits determination has been made on infringement or validity; the stay leaves all substantive issues unresolved pending the ITC's findings.
Full party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Noco, Co. | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Shenzhenshi Daosishangmao Youxiangongsi | Individual | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Ace Farmer LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Metasee LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Anna E Raimer | Attorney | Counsel for Noco, Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | David B. Cochran | Attorney | Counsel for Noco, Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | John C. Evans | Attorney | Counsel for Noco, Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Meredith M. Wilkes | Attorney | Counsel for Noco, Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Jones Day | Law Firm | Representing Noco, Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Jones Day (Houston) | Law Firm | Representing Noco, Co.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Lee H Rosenthal | Judge | Texas Southern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the portable vehicle battery jump-starter space
Forward-looking patent and innovation intelligence derived from NOCO's five-patent assertion against distributors of portable jump-starter products — relevant for product teams, IP counsel, and competitive strategists.
NOCO's multi-patent jump-starter portfolio signals deep claim coverage
NOCO has built a layered U.S. patent portfolio around portable jump-starter technology, spanning application families from at least US14/619655 to US16/587624. The breadth of five asserted patents across cell equalization, safety protection, and cable apparatus suggests active continuation filing. Monitoring NOCO's prosecution activity and new grants in this family is a priority for any competitor in the segment.
NOCO patent family depthBattery cell equalization in jump starters: where is the filing activity heading?
Battery cell equalization circuitry — a key technical feature in the asserted patents — is an active R&D area as lithium battery packs become more compact and powerful. Filing trends around equalization circuits for portable automotive power devices may reveal white space in thermal management, connector safety interlocks, and wireless diagnostics adjacent to the claimed inventions.
Cell equalization filing trendsDo Chinese jump-starter manufacturers hold defensive patents in this space?
Shenzhenshi Daosishangmao Youxiangongsi appears in this case as a distributor-level defendant. Understanding whether Chinese manufacturers supplying U.S. distributors hold their own patents in portable jump-starter circuitry or safety systems is critical for assessing whether cross-licensing or design-around paths are available — particularly as ITC exclusion orders loom.
Chinese OEM patent postureAdjacent innovation: smart diagnostics and wireless monitoring in jump starters
The asserted NOCO patents focus on equalization circuitry and cable-level safety protection. Adjacent white space may exist in smart diagnostic interfaces, app-connected battery health monitoring, and AI-driven jump-start protocols — areas not clearly covered by the asserted claims. R&D teams seeking to enter this market without infringing NOCO's portfolio may find more freedom in software-defined safety and connectivity layers.
Smart jump-starter white spaceSimilar patent cases: portable power and vehicle battery jump-starter disputes
Browse related patent infringement cases in the portable vehicle battery and jump-starter technology space, including parallel ITC and district court proceedings in U.S. federal courts.
What this case signals for the portable power and battery jump-starter IP landscape
NOCO's five-patent assertion, paired with simultaneous ITC proceedings, illustrates how patent holders in the portable power space are pursuing parallel enforcement tracks against import-channel defendants.
Parallel ITC and district court strategy is a high-leverage enforcement play
NOCO's simultaneous pursuit of ITC and district court proceedings against distributors of allegedly infringing jump starters suggests a coordinated enforcement strategy. ITC exclusion orders can block importation at the border, while district court actions preserve damages claims. Competitors and distributors in this space should monitor both tracks.
A stay does not end district court exposure — it defers it
The stay preserves NOCO's damages claims in the Southern District of Texas. Once the ITC proceeding resolves, the district court case is likely to resume. Defendants and their supply-chain partners cannot treat a stay as a final resolution; exposure to damages remains live until the case is formally terminated.
Noco v Shenzhenshi — key questions answered
NOCO Co. asserted five U.S. patents: US10328808B2, US11254213B2, US9770992B2, US11447023B2, and US10981452B2. All cover portable vehicle battery jump starters, including apparatus incorporating battery cell equalization circuits, safety protection features, and jumper cable devices.
The court granted a motion by defendants Metasee LLC and Ace Farmer LLC to stay the case pending resolution of related proceedings before the U.S. International Trade Commission. The recorded basis of termination is 'Case Stayed.' All deadlines were vacated and the parties must file a joint notice within 14 days of the ITC proceedings resolving.
No. A stay defers, rather than extinguishes, the district court proceedings. NOCO's infringement and damages claims remain live. Once the ITC proceedings resolve, the parties must propose to the court how the district court case should proceed. The specific terms of any eventual resolution are not available in the current record.
There are three defendants: Shenzhenshi Daosishangmao Youxiangongsi (a Chinese entity), Ace Farmer LLC, and Metasee LLC. Ace Farmer LLC and Metasee LLC are U.S.-based entities and were the movants who obtained the stay pending ITC proceedings.
Filing in both the ITC and a U.S. district court is a recognised dual-track enforcement strategy. The ITC can issue exclusion orders blocking importation of infringing goods, while the district court preserves monetary damages claims. District courts commonly stay proceedings pending ITC outcomes to avoid duplicating effort on overlapping patents and accused products.
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.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.