The complaint
The case is Shenzhen Chitado Technology Co., Ltd. v. Shenzhenshi Bailong Keji Youxiangongsi, No. 4:26-cv-01619 (E.D. Tex., Sherman Division). Chitado filed the complaint on October 30, 2026, and demands a jury trial. 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 describes Chitado as a Chinese limited liability company based in Shenzhen that designs, makes, and sells electric riding devices, including under its GYROOR brand. It alleges, upon information and belief, that the defendant is a Chinese company that operates the Amazon storefront Greatwork Direct, and it says Amazon's seller disclosure identifies the defendant as the business behind that storefront, located in Shenzhen, China.
The complaint alleges that on October 29, 2026, a GREATWORK K7 was ordered from Greatwork Direct through Amazon for delivery to Plano, Texas, and that Amazon's records identify Greatwork Direct as the seller. It pleads specific personal jurisdiction based on offers and sales directed to Texas and, in the alternative, jurisdiction under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(k)(2). It pleads venue under 28 U.S.C. 1391(c)(3), alleging, upon information and belief, that the defendant is not resident in the United States, and it places the case in the Sherman Division because Plano is in Collin County.
The two patents
The complaint asserts U.S. Patent 12,649,534, titled Electric Riding Device, issued June 9, 2026, and U.S. Patent 12,595,012, also titled Electric Riding Device, issued April 7, 2026. The complaint says both issued from applications filed September 26, 2025 as continuations in part of International Application No. PCT/CN2025/106945, and it alleges Chitado is the assignee and owner of all substantial rights in both patents and has complied with the marking statute, 35 U.S.C. 287(a). It asserts claims 6, 7, 9, and 15 of the '534 patent and claim 7 of the '012 patent, and attaches claim charts for the K7 and K7 Pro as Exhibits 4A, 4B, 5A, and 5B.
Claim 6 of the '534 patent covers an electric riding device with a frame body defining a substantially flat support plate, front and rear wheels, a handlebar assembly, a seat, a power device, and an open-top storage basket, at least part of which is configured to be removably coupled to the upper surface of the support plate, with left and right sidewalls that extend substantially vertically upward near the edges of the support plate when the basket is mounted, and left and right footrests installed near the front sides of the support plate. The complaint ties dependent claim 7 to a threaded basket-mounting mechanism and dependent claim 9 to a bent basket portion that conforms to the frame.
Claim 15 of the '534 patent, which the complaint calls representative, covers an electric riding device whose frame body has a storage cavity longer than it is wide or tall, defined at least 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 with an open top, with left and right footrests installed longitudinally nearer the front ends of the support plate than the rear ends.
Claim 7 of the '012 patent covers an electric riding device with a frame body having a substantially flat base portion and front and rear raised portions that support the head tube and the seat, a storage basket removably installed so that its contact surface rests on the upper surface of the base portion in substantially horizontal contact, and left and right footrests installed longitudinally nearer the front ends of the base portion than the rear ends.
The accused products
The complaint names the GREATWORK K7 and GREATWORK K7 Pro electric riding devices. It describes them as having front and rear wheels, a handlebar assembly, a seat, a power device, and a frame with a center storage basket between the wheels that is removable and secured to the frame with screws. It says the Amazon listings it identifies are representative and that its allegations also reach replacement or additional listings and color or battery-capacity variants.
The counts and relief
Count I alleges direct infringement of claims 6, 7, 9, and 15 of the '534 patent under 35 U.S.C. 271(a) by offering to sell and selling the accused products, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Count II makes the same allegation for claim 7 of the '012 patent. The complaint alleges, upon information and belief, that the accused sales have caused Chitado lost sales, price erosion, and harm to its customer relationships. It asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions under 35 U.S.C. 283 and Rule 65, an order requiring the defendant to remove or disable listings of enjoined products, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 including lost profits to the extent proven and no less than a reasonable royalty, a finding of willfulness and enhanced damages to the extent proven, attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C. 285, and costs.
The same products in No. 4:26-cv-01608
On October 29, 2026, Chitado filed No. 4:26-cv-01608 in the same court, which the docket assigns to Chief District Judge Mazzant. That complaint accuses the same GREATWORK K7 and K7 Pro of infringing the same claims of the same two patents, through Amazon, Walmart, and website sales channels.
What to watch next
The clerk issued a summons on November 2, 2026. Watch for service on the defendant, any motion for a preliminary injunction, any order relating or consolidating this case with No. 4:26-cv-01608, and the defendant's answer or a motion under Rule 12. The case can end at any time, including by settlement or voluntary dismissal.