Zhejiang Natural v. CAMPER GEAR: Default Judgment for Camping Mattress Patent
Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods secured a full default judgment against Shanghai Qingzhe Network Technology (d/b/a CAMPER GEAR) for infringing US10018280B2, a self-inflating camping mattress design patent sold via Amazon. The Illinois Northern District Court awarded $14,777.57 in compensatory damages and issued a permanent injunction — all resolved in just 81 days.
Amazon-seller patent clash ends in swift default victory for Chinese IP holder
Filed on 8 November 2024 in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, this infringement action pitted Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc. against Shanghai Qingzhe Network Technology Co., Ltd., operating under the brand CAMPER GEAR. The dispute centred on US10018280B2, a patent covering a self-inflating camping mattress, which Zhejiang Natural alleged was reproduced and sold without authorisation through the defendant’s Amazon storefront.
The case resolved on 28 January 2025 — just 81 days after filing — through default judgment. Shanghai Qingzhe failed to appear or respond, triggering a finding of liability under 35 U.S.C. § 271. Judge Elaine E. Bucklo granted Plaintiff’s motion in its entirety, awarding $14,777.57 in compensatory damages, issuing a permanent injunction against further infringement, and directing third-party platforms including Amazon and PayPal to freeze and release defendant’s account funds to satisfy the award.
The 81-day resolution is notably fast even for default proceedings, suggesting an aggressive enforcement posture by Glacier Law LLP on behalf of the plaintiff. The public record does not disclose whether the defendant was formally served in China or whether jurisdictional complications arose — factors that commonly delay or complicate cross-border default judgments. What remains unknown is whether Zhejiang Natural has identified additional infringing storefronts, given the order’s explicit provision for supplemental proceedings against newly discovered accounts.
Filing to Default Judgment in 81 days
81 days — faster than the median district court IP case, resolved by default
Default judgment entered: what the ruling means for both parties
Default judgment: liability found without contested merits
A default judgment under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55 is entered when a defendant fails to appear or respond. The court accepts well-pleaded allegations as admitted and may award full relief sought. Here, Shanghai Qingzhe’s non-appearance meant the court found patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271 without adversarial testing — a procedurally valid but uncontested liability finding.
Rule 55 default — unopposed liabilityFull award: damages, injunction, and asset freeze secured
Zhejiang Natural obtained everything it sought: $14,777.57 in compensatory damages, a permanent injunction barring future sales of infringing goods, and court orders directing Amazon and PayPal to freeze and release the defendant’s account funds. The order also grants ongoing authority to serve third-party providers if new accounts are identified — giving the plaintiff durable enforcement reach beyond this single storefront.
Permanent injunction + asset recoveryDeemed in default: full liability without opportunity to contest
By failing to appear, Shanghai Qingzhe forfeited the right to contest infringement, challenge patent validity, or dispute the damages quantum. The permanent injunction applies to affiliates and associated entities, and financial accounts are subject to immediate restraint. Default judgments in the U.S. carry limited avenues for relief — setting aside requires showing good cause, excusable neglect, or a meritorious defence.
Uncontested — limited appeal pathwayCross-border enforcement via Amazon ecosystem signals growing IP risk
This case is consistent with a broader enforcement pattern targeting Chinese Amazon sellers by Chinese patent holders — demonstrating that IP disputes in the outdoor goods sector now routinely leverage marketplace platform mechanisms (account freezes, ad takedowns) as enforcement tools. Sellers operating on Amazon without FTO clearance face swift, low-cost enforcement actions that can result in full account asset seizure within weeks.
Amazon enforcement — cross-border IP riskFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc. | Company | Outdoor goods manufacturer — holder of US10018280B2 (self-inflating camping mattress)Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Shanghai Qingzhe Network Technology Co., Ltd., d/b/a CAMPER GEAR | Company | Shanghai-based e-commerce seller operating as CAMPER GEAR on Amazon marketplaceSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Tao Liu | Attorney | Counsel for Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Wei Wang | Attorney | Counsel for Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Glacier Law LLP | Law Firm | Representing Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc.Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Elaine E. Bucklo | Judge | Illinois Northern District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The court’s verdict language is unusually comprehensive for a default proceeding, reflecting the plaintiff’s fully unopposed motion. The finding of liability under 35 U.S.C. § 271 and the damages award under § 284 are standard, but the operative injunction language — extending to ‘affiliates, officers, agents’ and ‘colorable imitations’ — casts a wide net designed to prevent entity-switching evasion. The simultaneous asset-freeze mechanism targeting PayPal and Amazon Pay accounts is a distinctive enforcement feature that transforms the judgment into near-immediate financial recovery, provided sufficient funds are held in those accounts at the time of service.
US10018280B2 — Self-Inflating Camping Mattress Design
US10018280B2, filed under application number US15/161644, protects the design and construction of a self-inflating camping mattress. Self-inflating mattress technology typically encompasses valve mechanisms, foam core integration, and outer shell construction that allow the mattress to expand automatically upon valve opening. The patent is held by Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc., a Chinese manufacturer active in the global outdoor recreation market. Its U.S. patent coverage provides actionable enforcement rights against infringing imports and online sales.
In the highly competitive outdoor sleep and camping comfort segment, design and utility differentiation is a key commercial lever. US10018280B2 gives Zhejiang Natural a basis to challenge competing Amazon sellers — including other Chinese manufacturers — who replicate its mattress configuration. The case demonstrates that Chinese IP holders are increasingly willing to assert U.S. patents offensively against rival sellers, a trend that signals a maturing enforcement posture among Chinese outdoor goods brands with U.S. patent portfolios.
Should you run an FTO against US10018280B2?
Any brand sourcing, developing, or listing self-inflating camping mattresses on U.S. e-commerce platforms — particularly Amazon — should conduct a freedom-to-operate review against US10018280B2. The injunction’s ‘colorable imitation’ standard means structural or aesthetic similarity, not just identical copying, can trigger liability. This is especially relevant for private-label outdoor brands, Amazon FBA sellers, and importers of Chinese-manufactured camping sleep products.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent allows you to map your product’s design features against the claims of US10018280B2, identify potential overlap, and surface related patents in the self-inflating mattress and outdoor sleep product space. Running a pre-listing FTO check can identify clearance risk before an enforcement letter — or a TRO — arrives at your door.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US10018280B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar patent cases: outdoor goods and Amazon seller enforcement
Cases involving patent infringement by Amazon marketplace sellers in the outdoor and camping equipment sector, litigated in U.S. district courts including the Northern District of Illinois.
What this case signals for the outdoor goods IP landscape
Default judgments targeting Amazon sellers are a fast, low-friction enforcement tool — and this case shows exactly how the playbook runs.
Amazon-seller enforcement is accelerating in the outdoor goods sector
This case follows a recognised litigation pattern: a patent holder files in a U.S. district court, obtains a TRO, then pursues default judgment when the defendant — often a cross-border seller — fails to respond. The result is a permanent injunction and asset freeze within months. Any brand selling comparable camping or outdoor sleep products on Amazon should treat FTO clearance as a pre-listing requirement, not an afterthought.
Third-party platform orders give judgments immediate commercial bite
The court’s order directly binding Amazon and PayPal to freeze and transfer funds transforms a paper judgment into immediate cash recovery. This mechanism bypasses conventional collection difficulties in cross-border enforcement. IP professionals advising e-commerce clients should note that a defendant’s Amazon or PayPal balance is effectively attachable under this framework from the moment a default order issues.
Zhejiang v Shanghai — key questions answered
The Northern District of Illinois entered a default judgment in favour of Zhejiang Natural on 28 January 2025. Shanghai Qingzhe failed to appear, resulting in a finding of patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 271, a compensatory damages award of $14,777.57, and a permanent injunction barring further sale of infringing goods.
The case concerns US10018280B2 (application no. US15/161644), a patent held by Zhejiang Natural Outdoor Goods Inc. covering a self-inflating camping mattress. The defendant was alleged to have sold infringing products through its Amazon storefront without the patent holder’s authorisation.
Judge Bucklo’s order directly bound third-party platforms — including Amazon and PayPal — to freeze the defendant’s financial accounts and release funds to the plaintiff within seven days of receiving notice. This marketplace-level enforcement mechanism allowed near-immediate asset recovery without requiring conventional cross-border debt collection.
The permanent injunction prohibits Shanghai Qingzhe, its affiliates, agents, and any persons acting in concert with it from offering for sale, selling, or importing products that reproduce or are colorable imitations of the designs claimed in US10018280B2. It also requires online platforms to disable infringing advertisements within five business days of receiving notice.
Potentially, but the bar is high. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 55(c) and 60(b), a defendant may seek to set aside a default judgment by demonstrating good cause, excusable neglect, or a meritorious defence. Given the comprehensive relief already granted — including asset transfers — any practical remedy would require prompt action and a substantive legal basis, which the public record does not currently disclose.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.