Shenzhen Chitado Has Filed at Least Six Suits in Three Districts on Two Electric Riding Device Patents.

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd., a Chinese company based in Shenzhen that its complaints describe as selling electric riding devices, including under its GYROOR brand, filed at least six patent suits between August 7 and October 30, 2026 on U.S. Patents 12,649,534 and 12,595,012, both titled Electric Riding Device: Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Windhorse Technologies Inc., No. 1:26-cv-09457 (N.D. Ill.); Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. EKU Inc., No. 2:26-cv-06693 (E.D.N.Y.); Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Howling Moto LLC, No. 1:26-cv-13032 (N.D. Ill.); Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. X Future LLC, No. 4:26-cv-01568 (E.D. Tex.); Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Great Work International Development Co., Limited, No. 4:26-cv-01608 (E.D. Tex.); and Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhenshi Bailong Keji Youxiangongsi, No. 4:26-cv-01619 (E.D. Tex.). The accused products are seated electric riding devices with a storage basket over a flat frame, which the complaints allege are sold through Amazon, Walmart, TikTok Shop, Temu, and brand websites. The first amended complaint in the Windhorse case is not available.

The six suits

The two patents

U.S. Patent 12,649,534 issued June 9, 2026 from Application No. 19/341,002 and has 15 claims. U.S. Patent 12,595,012 issued April 7, 2026 from Application No. 19/340,910 and has seven claims. Both applications were filed September 26, 2025 as continuations in part of International Application No. PCT/CN2025/106945, filed July 3, 2025, and the face of each patent lists Chitado as applicant and assignee. Each of the six complaints alleges that Chitado owns all substantial rights in both patents.

Claim 15 of the '534 patent, which the Windhorse, EKU, Howling Moto, Great Work, and Bailong complaints call representative, recites an electric riding device with a frame body defining a substantially flat support plate, front and rear wheels, a handlebar assembly, a seat, and a power device; a storage cavity longer than it is wide or tall, bounded in part by left and right sidewalls that rise from the edges of the support plate, are removably disposed on the frame body, and leave the cavity open at the top; and left and right footrests nearer the front ends of the support plate than the rear ends. The X Future complaint quotes claim 6 as representative, which recites an open-top storage basket removably coupled to the upper surface of the support plate, with sidewalls rising from near the plate's side edges, and footrests near the front of the support plate.

Claim 7 of the '012 patent, asserted in all six complaints, recites an electric riding device whose frame body has a substantially flat base portion with raised front and rear portions supporting the head tube and the seat, a storage basket removably installed so that its contact surface rests in substantially horizontal contact on the base portion, and left and right footrests nearer the front ends of the base portion than the rear ends. The Windhorse, EKU, and Howling Moto complaints also assert claims 1, 2, and 4 to 6 of the '012 patent.

What the complaints share

Each of the six complaints pleads direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271(a), literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, attaches claim charts for the accused models, and asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions under 35 U.S.C. 283, damages of no less than a reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. 284, a finding of willfulness with enhanced damages, attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C. 285, and costs. The EKU and Howling Moto complaints allege, on information and belief, that the defendant continues to infringe. The X Future complaint also pleads inducement under 35 U.S.C. 271(b) against the alleged manufacturer, and the Great Work and Bailong complaints allege, on information and belief, lost sales and price erosion.

Case by case

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Windhorse Technologies Inc., No. 1:26-cv-09457 (N.D. Ill.), filed August 7, 2026. The docket shows random assignment that day to District Judge LaShonda A. Hunt. The original complaint named nine defendants, accused the WINDHORSE C2 Cargo, C3, C3 Max, and D1 and C3 products sold under the RIDWIND and SEHOMY names, and asserted claims 1 to 4 and 6 to 15 of the '534 patent and claims 1, 2, and 4 to 7 of the '012 patent. On August 13, 2026, the court ordered Chitado to explain why joinder and personal jurisdiction were proper or to amend. The first amended complaint, filed August 20, 2026, dropped three of the original defendants, including EKU Inc. On August 25, 2026, the court found its concerns resolved, summarizing the amended complaint as alleging that the defendants operate at different levels of one stream of commerce for the same accused product: a manufacturer, its corporate parent selling on Amazon, two distributors under the WINDHORSE marks, and two sellers under private labels. The complaint in No. 1:26-cv-13032 describes this case as involving the same patents and WINDHORSE models. Windhorse Technologies Inc. was served September 3, 2026, and the court extended its response date to October 26, 2026. The docket then lists a motion to dismiss and to quash on October 27, an order on that motion on October 28, an entry titled Transfer Case on October 30, and a further order on the motion to dismiss and the motion to quash on November 2, 2026; those documents are not available.

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. EKU Inc., No. 2:26-cv-06693 (E.D.N.Y.), filed October 18, 2026. The docket shows assignment on October 19, 2026 to District Judge Nusrat J. Choudhury and Magistrate Judge Steven I. Locke. The complaint describes EKU Inc. as a New York corporation that sells the WINDHORSE C2 Cargo, C3, and C3 Max through its TikTok Shop storefront EKUNIVERS. It asserts claims 1 to 4 and 6 to 15 of the '534 patent and claims 1, 2, and 4 to 7 of the '012 patent. The docket entry for the return of service shows EKU served October 22, 2026, with an answer date of November 12, 2026.

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Howling Moto LLC, No. 1:26-cv-13032 (N.D. Ill.), filed October 22, 2026. The docket shows random assignment on October 23, 2026 to District Judge Franklin U. Valderrama. The complaint describes Howling Moto LLC as an Illinois limited liability company based in Spring Grove, Illinois that offers the WINDHORSE C2 Cargo, C3, and C3 Max for sale through howlingmoto.com, asserts the same claims as the EKU complaint, and identifies No. 1:26-cv-09457 as a related case before Judge Hunt. The latest docket entry is the summons the clerk issued on October 23, 2026.

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. X Future LLC, No. 4:26-cv-01568 (E.D. Tex., Sherman Division), filed October 23, 2026. The defendants are X Future LLC, which the complaint describes as a Texas limited liability company based in Plano, Texas; X Future Inc., which the complaint alleges, on information and belief, is a California corporation; five Amazon storefront operators; and Shenzhen Xincheng Times Technology Co., Ltd., which the complaint says FCC filings, product manuals, and Amazon product information identify as the manufacturer of the isinwheel H7 Pro and iScooter DX5 and, on information and belief, the source of the other accused products. The complaint alleges, on information and belief, that X Future LLC operates isinwheel.com and that X Future Inc. operates iscooter.com. It accuses the isinwheel H7 and H7 Pro and the iScooter DX5 and DX5 Pro, and it alleges that Shenzhen Xincheng Times induced infringement and, on information and belief, also directly infringed. The court's header stamp on the complaint, on a copy made after the docket's October 26, 2026 assignment entry, gives the case number as 4:26-cv-01568-ALM, the initials of Judge Amos L. Mazzant III. The clerk issued summonses on October 28, 2026.

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Great Work International Development Co., Limited, No. 4:26-cv-01608 (E.D. Tex., Sherman Division), filed October 29, 2026. The docket shows assignment that day to Chief District Judge Amos L. Mazzant. The complaint describes Great Work as a Hong Kong company and alleges, on information and belief, that it owns and operates the Amazon storefront GREAT WORK US, the Walmart storefront Greatwork Official Store, and greatworkbike.com, through which it sells the GREATWORK K7 and K7 Pro. Chitado filed a notice of related cases on October 30, 2026, and the clerk issued a summons to Great Work the same day.

Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhenshi Bailong Keji Youxiangongsi, No. 4:26-cv-01619 (E.D. Tex., Sherman Division), filed October 30, 2026. The docket shows a case assignment entry on November 2, 2026, and the court's header stamp on the complaint gives the case number as 4:26-cv-01619-ALM, the initials of Chief District Judge Amos L. Mazzant. The complaint alleges, upon information and belief, that the defendant is a Chinese company that operates the Amazon storefront Greatwork Direct, and it accuses the GREATWORK K7 and K7 Pro of infringing claims 6, 7, 9, and 15 of the '534 patent and claim 7 of the '012 patent, the same products and claims as the Great Work complaint. The clerk issued a summons on November 2, 2026.

What to watch next

In No. 1:26-cv-09457, watch for what follows the October 28 and November 2 orders on the motion to dismiss and to quash and the October 30 transfer entry; the court's September 22, 2026 order reset the deadline to file the form scheduling order for patent cases to November 9, 2026. In No. 2:26-cv-06693, watch for EKU's answer or Rule 12 motion. In the other four cases, watch for service, answers or Rule 12 motions, any motion for a preliminary injunction, any order relating Nos. 4:26-cv-01568, 4:26-cv-01608, and 4:26-cv-01619, and any motion to relate No. 1:26-cv-13032 to the Windhorse case. Any of the cases can end at any time, including by settlement or voluntary dismissal.