Pawesome Pet Products v. Colorflowers: Default Judgment & Permanent Injunction
Pawesome Pet Products and co-plaintiff Cindy Ghukasyan sued more than 150 online marketplace sellers in the Western District of Pennsylvania for infringing US10477838B2, a patent covering a chew toy for pet dental hygiene. After 565 days, the court granted a default judgment and permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs — with no defendant appearing to contest the claims.
Mass-defendant patent sweep: 150+ sellers, one patent, no defense filed
Filed on 28 April 2022 in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania before Judge Mark R. Hornak, this action was brought by Pawesome Pet Products, LLC and individual co-plaintiff Cindy Ghukasyan against Colorflowers and a sprawling group of more than 150 additional online marketplace defendants — including sellers operating under names such as Rayshop90, Taotaopet Store, and dozens of AliExpress-style storefronts — for infringement of US10477838B2, a patent covering a chew toy for pet dental hygiene.
The case closed on 14 November 2023. The recorded basis of termination is judgment on the merits for the plaintiff. The court granted both a motion for default judgment and a motion for permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, with judgment entered on the patent infringement claim as asserted in the complaint. The permanent injunction order is set forth in the court's order. No defendant agents or law firms appear in the record, consistent with a scenario in which defendants failed to appear or respond.
The 565-day duration suggests the plaintiffs' counsel at Ference & Associates LLC invested meaningful time prosecuting a default posture against a large and dispersed defendant group before obtaining the final injunction order. What specific injunctive relief terms were imposed — including scope, geographic reach, or any damages award — is not detailed in the available record beyond the court's reference to the order 'as set forth herein.' The specific financial or enforcement terms are not disclosed in the available record.
See Complete Case & Patent Analysis →Filing to Judgment on the merits for Plaintiff in 565 days
565 days from filing to closure — consistent with uncontested default proceedings
US10477838B2 — chew toy for pet dental hygiene
Any company or seller designing, manufacturing, importing, or listing a chew toy marketed for pet dental hygiene should assess their exposure to US10477838B2 before entering the market. This is particularly relevant for: online marketplace sellers sourcing products from overseas manufacturers; pet product brands launching dental care lines; and private-label importers listing pet chew products on Amazon, AliExpress, or similar platforms. A court-entered permanent injunction raises the stakes of getting this wrong.
Official order — verbatim text
The court's order simultaneously granted the motion for default judgment and the motion for permanent injunction, entering judgment in favor of the plaintiffs on the patent infringement claim as asserted in the complaint. The formulation 'as set forth herein' indicates the injunction's specific operative terms are contained in the court's order text, which is not reproduced in the available record. The absence of any defendant appearance means no invalidity, non-infringement, or claim construction defenses were adjudicated.
Default judgment and permanent injunction: what the ruling means for both parties
Default judgment: court finds for plaintiff without contest
A default judgment is entered when defendants fail to appear or respond to a complaint. The court granted Plaintiffs' motion for default judgment, meaning the infringement allegations in the complaint are taken as admitted. Separately, the court also granted a permanent injunction — a court order prohibiting the defendants from continuing the infringing activity. Both were entered on the merits in favor of the plaintiffs.
Judgment on the meritsPlaintiffs secure injunction against mass online sellers
Pawesome Pet Products and Cindy Ghukasyan obtained both a default judgment and a permanent injunction covering the infringing pet chew toy products. A permanent injunction is a significant enforcement tool — it carries contempt-of-court consequences for violation. The specific scope of the injunction, including any named platforms or sales channels, is not disclosed in the available record beyond the court's order.
Permanent injunction granted150+ sellers face binding judgment having never appeared
None of the more than 150 named defendants — ranging from named storefronts such as Colorflowers to numerous AliExpress and online marketplace sellers — retained counsel or filed a response. As a result, all are subject to the court's default judgment and permanent injunction. Defendants who wish to challenge the judgment would face the high bar of setting aside a default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c), which requires showing good cause.
No defense filedEnforcement template for multi-defendant patent sweeps in pet products
This case illustrates a common enforcement strategy: asserting a single patent against a large number of online marketplace sellers simultaneously. For patent holders in the pet products and consumer goods space, it demonstrates that U.S. courts will grant default judgments and permanent injunctions where defendants fail to appear. For marketplace operators and sellers, this signals meaningful exposure when infringing products are listed without vetting underlying IP rights.
Online marketplace IP enforcementFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Pawesome Pet Products, LLC | Company | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Plaintiff | Cindy Ghukasyan | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Colorflowers | Individual | /Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Rayshop90 | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Fagu7386 | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Jmshop Store | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Keithbates2012 | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Minaudas | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Others too numerous to list: DAYON_60, BESTZYKJ, MS HLHW03 STORE, DTMGOODS, MIXX LABORATORY, LIUMING79, COZY STYLE STORE, ENRIKASTORE, ILUZION69, KINGWORAUS, PAWFECTDEPOT, MUJOUTDAY, DAI DEPARTMENT STORE, NIGHACOLLECTION, JOSHBOYSGAMING, SHOP110006051, GOODEDEALSNOGALES, KIDON2014, TASTYBONE STORE, AVERHAYE-0, SHOP 5431295 STORE, SANDYS_PLACE_10, WNWZZ, MEBR007, HONGGANG2019-1, SHANGKEXINRIYONG, ALI CEILING STORE, LOVFU, DULANJANA87, UNEPART, FLOSIK TOYS, YGSYOUTH0410, NFDDIZAYN, PROGUNZXZ, SHOP-MIDA, FIRRY LIVING STORE, DETIAN STORE, VICKIE7772, FAIRYCITY, EVERCHIC SUCH-LIFE STORE, PALPLAZA, YOKEE PET STORE, FUTUSHIJIE STORE, HAPPINESS SUPERMARKET STORE, CHPODOO, MUSTANG692010, HSHEN, WANEN, ALIEXPRESS GOOD KITCHEN ASSISTANT STORE, ZH5682, GITTERM123, STAO STORE, RUIDAXINXI, SHOP4233035 STORE, XINHAO34, JIAYONGJINGMAOYOUZIANGONGSI, JB2010-2012, FCXDG PETSLIFE STORE, PEACEFUL62, QIREN32, FABLAB, STEVENATIN-0, TOBE-UNIQUE, NALINDSILV_0, JSGM17, DANTRESS, HOWARDHOME STORE, AYKEWA0, SMARTBUYSTORE_01, PURS_81, LEADING-WIRELESS, TA-558789, AMVEEDI, ANMEL-9921, TEENWAY, DOGGIEFUN STORE, BESHIL, PHKASI0, PRIMETIMEDISTRIBUTION94, BEAUTY.BOX, ANIYA LIFE STORE, BESTONLINESHOPS, MIAMI98, PUSHMYCART, HJKL PETSLIFE STORE, BOUTIQUE LIFE STORE, APPRETZMEDIA, CITRU_5625, SAVAGLO-15, MANSWILL, JSQQ STORE, THE NEIGHBOR'S STORE, DMG30, MS HLHW01 STORE, IDYDZ_ACCESSORIES, ALITTLETHINGS-XUMU, EMILY154, IIIX_TREAM, PRIMETIME_DISTRIBUTION, ARELYANGELLAURENT, ERUZARAY LIVING STORE, YCLOUD PET STORE, ROHAN_E_MART, CAMGAMESALES, MART-2216, SOLETGO, PETITPET STORE, MUCERIO7788, CUDDLY STORE, MATSOFAMIC PET OFFICIAL STORE, DOGI PET SUPPLIES STORE, SCRAGGY99, HAPPLYONEDAY, DBZON, AIMDOME, IPGY STORE, KCLU_30, NEW LIFE PRODUCTS STORE, ANIMALHOUSE STORE, DJPETSTORE, WANTED2017, CHA_G2GYVK, SUAZNAVARSHOP2, PETFITT, FOREVERYOUNG377, DAYTON_OHIO, JRTE-2662, SHELLBEAL, WA321849, GXBDYXGS, SHOP1100178032 STORE, EUPHORIAHM, XIAZIMEIZHUANG, JACBO_9711, Z-GROBAL, PICK PET OFFICIAL STORE, MHORLX STORE, GNDEALZ, RSCHLAPP, SLICKZTHINGS4U, WGGH, IT AND ME PET STORE, DONGGUAN SHI SHENGKE TECHNOLOGY CO., LTD, SITUO, IRONT7624, DAILYITEMSS, INC, HAPPYDEAL-MALL, DEDAGIRL, YANG168 STORE, LEM_5142, NORTHERNCOMM_33, JTAYLOR3344, SHENZHENDAYANGHUIXINKEJIYOUGONGSI, CHOUYUN, LICRAFT US, NANDAFER, JAFVN FASHION, MS HLHW02 STORE, SIGOLY, ARESTLE HOUSEWARES, ISENVO, JENNLYNNE2, KATJUUS, DZOMNOK STORE, JOYOFRELAX, WONIUNIU, SUNNELI, A INC, YIWU LINGCHONG PETS STORE, TWO L STORE, CHUN_8594, UNIVERSEABC, PRINCESSX4, EDINESSBOSS, EPICESOLUTIONS, FOCUS-PARTS, TEXMEDUSA, BETOCORONA37, NICS_NAXX, DPLIGHT, BELLAS_PAWTIQUE, MAN RUI DEPARTMENT STORE, 4ONTHERUN, TWELVE*29, NOTW92345, SILVA SHOP, SONGWAY PET, ANGELA_HFF78, PETHOBBY RJ-SHOP, HOW-1514, HYXFLY HOUSE STORE, WUHANCHAOYOUKUAJINGDIANZISHANGWUYOUXIANGONGSI | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Sankaragi-one | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Smartgoals | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Tangnert | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Taotaopet Store | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Brian Samuel Malkin | Attorney | Counsel for Pawesome Pet Products, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Stanley D. Ference , III | Attorney | Counsel for Pawesome Pet Products, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Ference & Associates LLC | Law Firm | Representing Pawesome Pet Products, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Mark R. Hornak | Judge | Pennsylvania Western District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
R&D signals in the pet dental hygiene and chew toy IP space
Forward-looking patent and innovation intelligence derived from the Pawesome Pet Products v. Colorflowers case and the broader pet dental hygiene technology landscape.
Pawesome Pet Products' IP footprint beyond US10477838B2
US10477838B2 is the asserted patent, but patent holders who pursue mass-defendant enforcement actions typically hold broader portfolios. Mapping Cindy Ghukasyan's and Pawesome Pet Products' full filing history — including continuations, design patents, and pending applications — reveals the scope of their protected IP and signals where future enforcement actions may focus in the pet dental hygiene category.
Portfolio mappingFiling trends in pet dental hygiene chew toy patents
The pet oral care market has attracted growing patent activity as consumer spending on pet health rises. Tracking filing trends around chew toy designs, dental hygiene formulations integrated into toys, and material innovations reveals who is building defensible IP positions in this space — and where crowding or white space exists for new product development.
Filing trend analysisDo the defendant sellers hold any offsetting pet product IP?
The 150+ defendants in this case are predominantly online marketplace storefronts. While most are unlikely to hold registered IP, investigating whether any named entities — particularly the larger or more established storefronts — hold utility or design patents in the pet supplies space can reveal whether competitive IP counter-claims or cross-licensing dynamics could arise in future, contested enforcement actions.
Competitor patent auditAdjacent innovation opportunities near US10477838B2
US10477838B2 protects a specific chew toy configuration for pet dental hygiene. Adjacent areas — including smart dental monitoring integrated into chew toys, novel antimicrobial materials, enzymatic coatings, and breed-specific ergonomic designs — may represent unprotected white space. R&D teams looking to enter the pet dental care category without infringing the asserted patent should map these adjacencies before committing to product architecture.
White space mappingSimilar patent infringement cases: pet products and multi-defendant online seller suits
Browse related patent infringement actions in the pet products sector and multi-defendant online marketplace enforcement cases filed in U.S. district courts.
What this case signals for the pet products IP enforcement landscape
Mass-defendant default judgment actions are an increasingly visible tactic in consumer goods patent enforcement — this case is a textbook example.
Permanent injunctions are obtainable by default against marketplace sellers
Where defendants fail to appear, U.S. district courts will grant both default judgment and permanent injunctive relief on patent infringement claims. Patent holders in the pet products and consumer goods space should consider whether this enforcement model fits their portfolio strategy, particularly against overseas marketplace storefronts.
Multi-defendant suits compress enforcement cost across large seller pools
Filing against 150+ defendants in a single action — as Pawesome did here — allows a patent holder to obtain broad injunctive relief with a single court order. This approach is particularly suited to patents covering commodity consumer products sold across open marketplaces where individual damages per seller may be low but collective infringement is substantial.
Pawesome v Colorflowers — key questions answered
The court entered a default judgment and permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs, Pawesome Pet Products, LLC and Cindy Ghukasyan, on the patent infringement claim asserted against the defendants. The recorded basis of termination is judgment on the merits for the plaintiff. No defendants appeared or filed a defense.
The sole patent asserted was US10477838B2, with application number US15/472206. The patent covers a chew toy for pet dental hygiene. The case was filed in the Western District of Pennsylvania and closed after 565 days.
More than 150 defendants were named, including Colorflowers as the primary defendant and a large number of additional online marketplace storefronts identified by seller handles on platforms consistent with AliExpress and similar sites. None of the defendants retained counsel or appeared in the record.
The court granted a permanent injunction in favor of the plaintiffs. The court's order states relief is granted 'as set forth herein,' but the specific operative terms of the injunction — including precise scope, geographic reach, or named platforms — are not disclosed in the available record.
The plaintiffs, Pawesome Pet Products, LLC and Cindy Ghukasyan, were represented by Brian Samuel Malkin and Stanley D. Ference III of Ference & Associates LLC. No defense counsel appears in the record, consistent with the defendants' failure to appear.
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.