Jisu Technology v. Schedule A Defendants: Default Judgment on JisuLife Neck Fan Patents
Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd. asserted four utility patents covering its JisuLife portable neck fans against anonymous online marketplace sellers in the Northern District of Illinois. With no defendant appearing to contest the claims, the court entered a final default judgment — fully enforceable — just 157 days after filing.
JisuLife patent holder wins default judgment over online counterfeit sellers
On 12 July 2024, Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd. — maker of the JisuLife-branded portable neck fans — filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois (Case No. 1:24-cv-05905), naming a class of anonymous individual and entity defendants identified on Schedule A and operating through online marketplace accounts. The plaintiff asserted four U.S. utility patents: US11920602B2, US11719250B2, US11661947B2, and US11635083B2, all directed at portable neck fan technology.
The case closed on 16 December 2024 via final default judgment against Shenzhen Hengshenghang Industrial Co., Ltd. — the defendant identified on Schedule A that had not been dismissed. Because no defendant appeared or filed a responsive pleading, the court granted Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default and default judgment. Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 62, the judgment was made immediately enforceable. The $1,000 bond previously posted by Plaintiff was ordered released to Bishop Diehl & Lee, Ltd., Plaintiff’s counsel.
The 157-day duration from filing to final judgment is consistent with the expedited pace typical of Schedule A e-commerce enforcement actions, where defendants rarely appear and courts can move swiftly to protect brand holders. The public record does not disclose monetary damages awarded or specific injunctive terms beyond enforceability, which is common in default judgment proceedings of this type. What remains unknown is whether Plaintiff pursued asset restraint or injunctive relief against the defendants’ marketplace accounts prior to final judgment.
Filing to Default Judgment in 157 days
157-day resolution — faster than the typical 2–3 year district court average for contested IP cases
Default judgment entered: what this ruling means for both parties
Default judgment: court rules without a contested hearing
A default judgment is entered when a defendant fails to appear or respond to the complaint. Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55, the court accepts well-pleaded allegations as true and awards relief as appropriate. Here, the Defaulting Defendant — Shenzhen Hengshenghang Industrial Co., Ltd. — did not contest the four patent infringement claims, enabling the court to enter judgment in Plaintiff’s favour without a trial.
Fed. R. Civ. P. 55 & 62 appliedJisu Technology secures immediately enforceable judgment
The final default judgment is immediately enforceable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 62, giving Jisu Technology a direct legal instrument to pursue marketplace account takedowns, asset recovery, or cross-border enforcement. The bond posted at case inception was returned to counsel, signalling the protective measures sought at the outset are no longer required as conditions of relief.
Immediate enforceability confirmedNon-appearing sellers face binding judgment with no right preserved
By failing to appear, Shenzhen Hengshenghang Industrial Co., Ltd. forfeited its ability to contest infringement, challenge patent validity, or negotiate terms. The default judgment binds the defendant without any merits adjudication. While a defendant may move to vacate a default judgment under Rule 60(b), this requires showing good cause and is rarely successful absent excusable neglect or a meritorious defence.
No validity challenge madeSchedule A enforcement remains a potent e-commerce IP tool
This outcome is consistent with a wave of Schedule A enforcement actions by Chinese consumer electronics brands protecting their own IP against copycat online sellers. The default judgment mechanism, combined with TRO practice and marketplace account freezes, creates a fast-track enforcement pathway. Competitors and brand owners operating in the portable personal cooling space should monitor Jisu Technology’s four-patent portfolio as an active enforcement asset.
E-commerce IP enforcement trendFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd. | Company | Consumer electronics brand — holder of US11920602B2 and three related neck fan patentsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified on Schedule A | Company | Anonymous online marketplace sellers, incl. Shenzhen Hengshenghang Industrial Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Benjamin Adam Campbell | Attorney | Counsel for Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Edward L. Bishop | Attorney | Counsel for Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Nicholas S. Lee | Attorney | Counsel for Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Sameeul Haque | Attorney | Counsel for Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Bishop Diehl & Lee, Ltd. | Law Firm | Representing Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge LaShonda A. Hunt | Judge | Illinois Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The final default judgment names Shenzhen Hengshenghang Industrial Co., Ltd. as the Defaulting Defendant and was entered after no responsive pleading was filed. The verdict language invokes Fed. R. Civ. P. 62 to make the judgment immediately enforceable — a notable procedural step that removes the standard 30-day stay, enabling Plaintiff to act on the judgment without delay. The release of the $1,000 bond to counsel confirms all interim protective conditions have been resolved. No merits determination on patent validity or infringement scope was made by the court.
US11920602B2 — portable neck fan technology (and 3 related patents)
The four asserted patents — US11920602B2, US11719250B2, US11661947B2, and US11635083B2 — collectively cover the JisuLife portable neck fan product line, with U.S. application numbers filed between 2022 and 2023. These utility patents protect structural and functional aspects of wearable personal cooling devices, a product category that has seen rapid commercialisation on global e-commerce platforms. The staggered filing and grant dates suggest a deliberate portfolio-building strategy designed to provide overlapping coverage across successive product generations.
For the portable consumer electronics sector, this four-patent cluster represents a meaningful enforcement moat around the JisuLife neck fan form factor. The Northern District of Illinois was selected — consistent with its reputation as a preferred venue for Schedule A actions — and the multi-patent assertion strategy makes it significantly harder for copycat sellers to identify a single design-around. Competitors and private-label sellers sourcing similar products for U.S. marketplace channels should treat this portfolio as an active and demonstrated enforcement risk.
Should you run an FTO against US11920602B2 and the JisuLife neck fan portfolio?
Any company manufacturing, importing, or selling portable wearable neck fans — or adjacent personal cooling devices — for the U.S. market should treat Jisu Technology’s four-patent portfolio as a priority FTO target. The patents cover key functional and structural elements of neck fan design, and the enforcement action confirms that Jisu Technology is actively willing to pursue infringers through U.S. federal courts. Marketplace sellers, OEM suppliers, and private-label brands are all within the risk perimeter.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim scope of US11920602B2, US11719250B2, US11661947B2, and US11635083B2 against your product specifications in minutes — identifying which claims pose the highest infringement risk and surfacing prior art that could support an invalidity argument if needed. For product teams developing next-generation wearable cooling devices, Eureka’s landscape analysis can also flag Jisu Technology’s pending applications before they reach grant.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11920602B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar portable electronics patent suits in the Northern District of Illinois
Explore comparable Schedule A patent infringement actions involving wearable consumer electronics and personal cooling devices litigated in the Northern District of Illinois.
What this case signals for the portable electronics IP landscape
Jisu Technology’s aggressive four-patent enforcement strategy signals a maturing IP posture among Chinese consumer electronics exporters in U.S. courts.
Schedule A actions deliver fast, enforceable results for brand holders
The 157-day resolution demonstrates that Schedule A e-commerce enforcement suits in the Northern District of Illinois can deliver final, immediately enforceable judgments before most contested IP cases even reach claim construction. Brand owners in the consumer electronics space should consider whether this procedural vehicle fits their enforcement roadmap.
Four-patent portfolio depth raises the bar for competing neck fan sellers
Asserting four utility patents simultaneously — US11920602B2, US11719250B2, US11661947B2, and US11635083B2 — signals that Jisu Technology has layered its IP protection across multiple design and functional aspects of neck fan technology. Any competitor or marketplace seller in the portable cooling space faces a multi-front infringement risk that is harder to design around.
Shenzhen v Individuals — key questions answered
The Northern District of Illinois entered a final default judgment in favour of Shenzhen Jisu Technology Co., Ltd. on 16 December 2024. The Defaulting Defendant — Shenzhen Hengshenghang Industrial Co., Ltd. — failed to appear, and the judgment was made immediately enforceable under Fed. R. Civ. P. 62.
Jisu Technology asserted four U.S. utility patents: US11920602B2, US11719250B2, US11661947B2, and US11635083B2. All four patents relate to the JisuLife portable neck fan product line and were filed between 2022 and 2023.
Schedule A defendants are typically anonymous individuals, companies, or online marketplace sellers identified by their platform account rather than their legal name at the time of filing. This procedural device is widely used in the Northern District of Illinois to pursue counterfeit or infringing sellers who would otherwise evade service. Defendants are named on a sealed exhibit (Schedule A) attached to the complaint.
Yes. A defendant subject to a default judgment may move to vacate it under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), but must demonstrate good cause — typically excusable neglect, a lack of actual notice, or the existence of a meritorious defence. Courts apply this standard strictly, and success rates are low, particularly where the defendant was aware of the proceedings and chose not to appear.
The Northern District of Illinois has developed efficient procedures for handling Schedule A e-commerce enforcement actions, including expedited TRO hearings and asset freeze orders against online marketplace accounts. The district’s familiarity with this docket type and its proximity to major logistics infrastructure make it a preferred venue for Chinese brand holders — including Jisu Technology — seeking fast, enforceable relief against infringing sellers.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.