Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. v. Digital Distillery: Default Judgment on Cocktail Smoker Patent
Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. sued Digital Distillery and co-defendants for infringing US11744256B2, covering the Foghat Cocktail Smoker device and associated wood chip storage tin. The Virginia Eastern District Court entered default judgment in plaintiff’s favour at $5.00 per infringing unit sold, with costs and attorneys’ fees still to be determined — closing the case after 463 days.
Cocktail smoker patent enforced by default against marketplace sellers
Thousand Oaks Barrel Co., LLC — owner of the Foghat Cocktail Smoker brand — filed suit in the Virginia Eastern District Court on 16 November 2023 against a set of online marketplace operators and overseas entities, including Digital Distillery, LLC, Guizhou WeishikeJi Youxiangongsi, Hgsoor Store, and OGERY Direct. The complaint alleged infringement of US11744256B2, a patent covering the Foghat Cocktail Smoker device and its accompanying storage tin with wood chips.
On 21 February 2025, the court entered judgment by default against the non-appearing defendants, ordering $5.00 per infringing unit sold, plus reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees to be determined. A default judgment on the merits means the defendants failed to mount a legal defence, and the court accepted the plaintiff’s factual allegations as established. This outcome confers full legal force on the damages award without requiring trial on the merits.
The 463-day duration is consistent with enforcement actions where overseas or marketplace defendants fail to appear. The per-unit damages structure suggests Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. pursued a quantifiable royalty-style remedy rather than a lump-sum award, which is strategically notable for ongoing enforcement against additional sellers. The full financial exposure for each defendant remains partly open until the court rules on costs and fees.
Filing to Judgment on the merits for Plaintiff in 463 days
463 days from filing to default judgment — typical for uncontested enforcement actions
Default judgment for plaintiff: what the $5/unit ruling means for both parties
Default judgment enters without contested trial
A default judgment is entered when defendants fail to appear or respond. The court treats the plaintiff’s well-pleaded allegations as admitted and issues relief accordingly. Here, the court entered judgment on the merits under Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, meaning the award carries the same legal weight as a post-trial verdict and is enforceable against the named defendants.
Judgment on the meritsThousand Oaks secures per-unit damages and fee entitlement
Plaintiff obtains a damages structure of $5.00 per infringing unit sold — a figure that scales with sales volume and can be re-deployed in future enforcement actions as a precedent benchmark. Costs and attorneys’ fees remain open, potentially increasing total recovery. The judgment also validates the enforceability of US11744256B2 against this class of product, strengthening its deterrent value in the marketplace.
$5/unit + fees pendingNon-appearing defendants face enforceable monetary judgment
By failing to appear, the defendant entities — including overseas seller Guizhou WeishikeJi Youxiangongsi and marketplace operators Hgsoor Store and OGERY Direct — have exhausted their ability to contest liability in this proceeding. The judgment is immediately enforceable. Collection against overseas entities may present practical challenges, but the judgment preserves plaintiff’s rights to pursue assets in any jurisdiction.
Default — no defence enteredPer-unit award sets a replicable enforcement template
The $5/unit damages structure is commercially significant: it signals that Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. is pursuing a scaled enforcement strategy against marketplace sellers of infringing cocktail smoker products. Other online sellers of similar devices should treat US11744256B2 as an active enforcement risk. The per-unit framing makes future actions straightforward to quantify, potentially deterring low-margin counterfeit sellers from entering the market.
Active enforcement riskFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Thousand Oaks Barrel Co., LLC | Company | Consumer goods brand — holder of US11744256B2 covering the Foghat Cocktail SmokerSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated Associations | Individual | Online marketplace sellers and overseas entities alleged to sell infringing cocktail smoker productsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Digital Distillery, LLC | Company | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Guizhou WeishikeJi Youxiangongsi | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Hgsoor Store | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | OGERY Direct | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Joseph J. Zito | Attorney | Counsel for Thousand Oaks Barrel Co., LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Kendal Meredith Sheets | Attorney | Counsel for Thousand Oaks Barrel Co., LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Dnl Zito Castellano PLLC | Law Firm | Representing Thousand Oaks Barrel Co., LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Alan Wilmot | Attorney | Counsel for The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Cecil Elvis Key , Jr. | Attorney | Counsel for The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Darren Heitner | Attorney | Counsel for The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Hyung Gyu Sun | Attorney | Counsel for The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Dunlap Bennett & Ludwig, PLLC (leesburg) | Law Firm | Representing The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Heitner Legal, P.L.L.C. (NA) | Law Firm | Representing The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Key Kesan Dallmann, PLLC | Law Firm | Representing The Partnerships, Companies, and Unincorporated AssociationsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Virginia Eastern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s order frames damages as ‘$5.00 per infringing unit sold’ — a per-unit royalty structure rather than a fixed lump sum. This phrasing implies the total award is variable and dependent on verified sales figures from the defaulting defendants, which may require further proceedings to quantify precisely. The phrase ‘judgment on the merits’ confirms this is not a procedural dismissal but a substantive finding, giving the award full res judicata effect. The reservation of costs and attorneys’ fees indicates at least one further court filing will be required to close out total financial exposure.
US11744256B2 — Foghat Cocktail Smoker device and wood chip storage tin
US11744256B2 protects the Foghat Cocktail Smoker, a consumer device designed to infuse cocktails and beverages with smoke flavour using wood chips. Filed under application number US17/100797, the patent covers both the smoking apparatus and its accompanying wood chip storage tin as a combined product offering. The patent sits at the intersection of consumer kitchenware and experiential beverage accessories — a fast-growing niche driven by home bartending trends.
From a strategic standpoint, US11744256B2 represents a product-level IP position in the cocktail accessory market, where Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. has built the Foghat brand. The patent’s enforcement against multiple online marketplace sellers — including overseas manufacturers — signals active commercial value. Competitors in the cocktail smoker category, particularly those sourcing from Chinese manufacturers or selling through Amazon storefronts, face direct infringement risk if their products replicate the claimed device and storage tin combination.
Should you run an FTO against US11744256B2?
Any company designing, manufacturing, importing, or selling cocktail smoking devices — particularly those bundled with wood chip storage accessories — should conduct a freedom-to-operate analysis against US11744256B2 before market entry. The patent has now been tested in litigation and survived to a merits-based default judgment, confirming its active enforcement status. Marketplace sellers on Amazon, Etsy, or similar platforms are especially exposed given the plaintiff’s demonstrated willingness to target storefront operators directly.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the independent and dependent claims of US11744256B2 against your product specification, flag overlapping claim elements, and surface prior art that may inform a design-around strategy. Eureka also tracks the litigation history of this patent in real time, so your IP and R&D teams receive alerts if new enforcement actions are filed — enabling proactive risk management before product launch.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11744256B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar cocktail smoker and consumer goods patent enforcement cases
Browse related patent infringement actions involving consumer kitchenware and beverage accessory devices in US district courts, including marketplace seller enforcement patterns.
What this case signals for the cocktail smoker and barware IP landscape
A default judgment with a per-unit damages formula suggests a deliberate, scalable enforcement posture by Thousand Oaks Barrel Co.
Per-unit default judgments are a repeatable enforcement tool
The $5/unit structure obtained here can be cited in future actions against other marketplace sellers of the same infringing product category. Patent holders in consumer goods facing e-commerce infringement increasingly rely on default judgments to establish damages benchmarks without costly trials. Any seller of cocktail smoker devices should audit their products against US11744256B2.
Overseas marketplace defendants rarely mount defences — and plaintiffs plan for it
The defendant roster includes a Chinese entity (Guizhou WeishikeJi Youxiangongsi) and what appear to be Amazon or similar marketplace storefronts. This pattern — filing against multiple named and unnamed sellers simultaneously — is a well-established anti-counterfeiting tactic. IP teams monitoring barware and cocktail accessory categories should expect continued enforcement actions by Thousand Oaks Barrel Co.
Thousand v Partnerships — key questions answered
The Virginia Eastern District Court entered default judgment in favour of Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. on 21 February 2025. The judgment awarded $5.00 per infringing unit sold by the defaulting defendants, with reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees to be determined separately by the court.
The case asserts US11744256B2, filed under application number US17/100797, covering the Foghat Cocktail Smoker device together with its wood chip storage tin. The patent covers the device as a consumer cocktail infusion product and has now been enforced to a merits-based default judgment.
The named defendants include Digital Distillery LLC, Guizhou WeishikeJi Youxiangongsi (a Chinese entity), Hgsoor Store, and OGERY Direct, along with an umbrella designation covering related partnerships, companies, and unincorporated associations. None of the defendants mounted a legal defence, resulting in default judgment.
The $5/unit damages award establishes a per-unit enforcement benchmark that Thousand Oaks Barrel Co. may cite in future actions against other sellers of infringing cocktail smoker products. Sellers — particularly online marketplace operators — should treat US11744256B2 as an actively enforced patent and conduct FTO analysis before selling similar devices.
The default judgment reserved determination of reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees to a later court proceeding. The total fee award has not yet been quantified as of the case close date of 21 February 2025. This means defendants’ total financial exposure remains open pending a further court order on costs.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.