Court Issues Permanent Injunction Against Chinese Manufacturer in EMF Protection Patent Dispute
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
📋 Case Summary
| Case Name | Switch Project, LLC v. Hunan Xin Xun Huan Electronic Tech Co. LTD. |
| Case Number | 1:25-cv-01546 |
| Court | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois |
| Duration | Feb 2025 – Apr 2025 63 days |
| Outcome | Plaintiff Win – Permanent Injunction |
| Patents at Issue | |
| Accused Products | “Only Jane Ear Protection Sticker” (EMF shielding sticker) |
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
Patent owner, asserting rights as assignee of the ‘471 Patent. The company holds a portfolio of at least three U.S. patents in the EMF protection and electronic shielding technology space.
🛡️ Defendant
Chinese electronics manufacturer alleged to have manufactured, imported, and sold infringing EMF sticker products into the United States market.
Patents at Issue
This landmark case involved three U.S. patents covering EMF protection technology:
- • U.S. Patent No. 11,678,471 — the primary patent at issue, issued June 13, 2023, covering EMF protection technology
- • U.S. Patent No. 11,412,645 — related patent in the portfolio
- • U.S. Patent No. 12,133,371 — related patent in the portfolio
The Accused Product
The accused product is the “Only Jane Ear Protection Sticker” — an EMF shielding sticker marketed for use near or on electronic devices. The complaint alleged that Hunan Xin Xun Huan’s EMF stickers were manufactured, imported, offered for sale, and sold in the United States in direct violation of 35 U.S.C. § 271.
Legal Representation
Switch Project was represented by Alan W. Nicgorski and Cody Ross LeJeune of Hansen Reynolds LLC and LeJeune Law PC, respectively. The defendant entered no legal representation and failed to respond to the proceedings.
📎 View case documents on PACER using Case No. 1:25-cv-01546. Search U.S. Patent No. 11,678,471 on the USPTO Patent Full-Text Database.
Developing a similar product?
Check if your EMF protection product might infringe these or related patents.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
On April 17, 2025, Judge Harjani entered Judgment and Permanent Injunction entirely in favor of Switch Project, LLC. The court confirmed jurisdiction and proper venue, validated Switch Project’s ownership and assignment of the ‘471 Patent, found the ‘471 Patent valid and enforceable, found that Hunan Xin Xun Huan infringed the ‘471 Patent under 35 U.S.C. § 271, and found that Switch Project suffered and will continue to suffer irreparable harm.
Specific damages amounts were not disclosed in the available case data.
Injunctive Relief Scope & Legal Issues
The permanent injunction is notably broad. It prohibits Hunan Xin Xun Huan — including its parents, subsidiaries, officers, agents, employees, and any party in active concert — from manufacturing, using, selling, offering for sale, advertising, promoting, or importing the accused EMF sticker products into the United States, or importing or selling any products only colorably different from the accused products under the ‘471 Patent claims. This “colorably different” standard is a critical legal threshold, preventing minor cosmetic modifications to circumvent injunctions.
This case was resolved via default judgment, meaning the court did not conduct a merits-based claim construction hearing or infringement analysis in a contested proceeding. However, the court still formally found infringement and patent validity—findings with legal consequence regardless of the procedural posture. The court’s authorization of email service on a Chinese entity reflects growing judicial recognition that traditional service methods can be insufficient or impractical for enforcement against foreign online sellers.
Litigation Timeline & Procedural History
| Complaint Filed | February 13, 2025 |
| Court Orders Email Service | February 20, 2025 |
| Defendant Served via Email | February 21, 2025 |
| Judgment & Permanent Injunction Entered | April 17, 2025 |
| Total Duration | 63 days |
The case moved with notable speed, concluding well below the typical timeline for contested patent litigation.
Filing a utility patent?
Learn from this case. Use AI to draft stronger claims that can withstand litigation.
Power Your Patent Strategy with Eureka IP
From novelty searches to patent drafting, Eureka’s AI-powered tools help you navigate the patent landscape with confidence.
⚠️ Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in EMF protection product design and manufacturing. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- View Switch Project’s 3 related patents
- See how courts handle email service for foreign defendants
- Understand the impact of “colorably different” injunctions
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
EMF protection technology
3 Key Patents
In Switch Project’s portfolio
Swift Injunction Risk
Achievable through default judgment
✅ Key Takeaways
For Patent Attorneys & Litigators
Default judgment actions can yield enforceable permanent injunctions within 63 days when procedural requirements are properly met.
Search related case law →Email service authorization is an effective tool for reaching foreign defendants who lack U.S. registered agents.
Explore precedents →The “colorably different” standard in injunction drafting is essential to prevent post-judgment workarounds.
Learn more about injunctions →For IP Professionals
Multi-patent portfolios in emerging product categories (like EMF protection) create durable competitive moats.
Explore patent portfolios →Monitor Switch Project’s patent portfolio (U.S. 11,678,471; 11,412,645; 12,133,371) for continuation filings or future assertions.
Track patent activities →For R&D Teams
Conduct FTO analysis on EMF shielding technologies before U.S. market entry.
Start FTO analysis for my product →Supplier agreements should include IP indemnification clauses to protect against third-party patent claims.
Explore IP contract templates →Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join thousands of IP professionals using Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyze competitive landscapes.