The parties and the patent
The case is Dyson Technology Limited v. The Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A, No. 1:26-cv-12608 (N.D. Ill.). The complaint describes Dyson as a limited company based in Malmesbury, United Kingdom. The defendants are not named in the body of the complaint: Schedule A, attached to the complaint, is the list of defendants and the seller aliases and online marketplace stores the complaint attributes to them. The complaint does not say that Schedule A is filed under seal. It alleges, on information and belief, that the defendants reside or operate in the People's Republic of China or other foreign jurisdictions. No judge was shown as assigned on the docket when this page was written.
U.S. Design Patent D710,299, titled Battery Pack, issued August 5, 2014, and claims the ornamental design for a battery pack as shown and described. It names James Dyson, Peter David Gammack, Timothy Nicholas Stickney, and Jonathan George Marsh as inventors, and the complaint says Dyson is the assignee. Google Patents lists August 5, 2028 as its anticipated expiration date. The complaint says Dyson products embodying the design are marked under 35 U.S.C. 287(a).
What the complaint alleges
The complaint alleges that the defendants make, use, offer for sale, sell, or import the same product, the battery pack shown in its Exhibit 1, through e-commerce stores that target United States consumers, offer shipping to Illinois, and accept payment in U.S. dollars, and, on information and belief, that they have sold the product to Illinois residents. It alleges that the defendants' activities "constitute the same occurrence or series of occurrences," language that tracks the permissive joinder standard of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 20(a)(2), which refers to the same transaction, occurrence, or series of transactions or occurrences. It alleges that e-commerce store operators like the defendants use multiple seller aliases to conceal their identities and move funds to offshore accounts, and that their infringement was willful. Venue is pleaded under 28 U.S.C. 1391.
There is one count, direct and indirect infringement of the D710,299 patent under 35 U.S.C. 271.
Relief requested
Dyson asks that the defendants and those acting with them be temporarily, preliminarily, and permanently enjoined from making, using, offering, selling, or importing the accused products and from assisting others to do so; for an order that, on Dyson's request, those with notice of the injunction, including online marketplace platforms, disable and stop displaying the defendants' advertisements for the products; for damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 of no less than a reasonable royalty, with interest and costs, increased three times; in the alternative, for the defendants' profits under 35 U.S.C. 289; and for reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. The complaint does not include a jury demand. Counsel for Dyson are Justin R. Gaudio, Justin T. Joseph, and Jennifer V. Nacht of Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. of Chicago.
What to watch next
Watch for the judge assignment, any motion to file Schedule A under seal, any motion for a temporary restraining order or asset restraint, and any motion for leave to serve the defendants electronically. The docket shows a same-day entry, ECF No. 4, described as leave to file a document; its text was not available when this page was written.