The parties and the patent
The case is Wheel Pros, LLC v. Katana Racing, Inc., No. 2:26-cv-11803 (C.D. Cal.). The complaint describes Wheel Pros as a Delaware limited liability company based in Greenwood Village, Colorado, and Katana as a California corporation based in Pomona, California. U.S. Design Patent D1,091,427, titled Wheel, issued September 2, 2025, and claims the ornamental design for a wheel as shown and described.
What the complaint alleges
The complaint places the front face of the Grit wheel next to FIG. 2 of the patent and alleges that the Grit wheel has an overall appearance that is substantially the same as the claimed design in the eyes of the ordinary observer, in view of the prior art. It says Wheel Pros notified Katana by emails and letters on August 6 and August 20, 2026, and that Katana took no responsive action. It alleges willfulness on information and belief.
Relief requested
Wheel Pros asks for preliminary and permanent injunctions under 35 U.S.C. 283; the greatest of Katana's total profits under 35 U.S.C. 289, lost profits or a reasonable royalty under 35 U.S.C. 284, or statutory damages under section 289, with pre-judgment and post-judgment interest; trebled damages; and costs and attorneys' fees under 35 U.S.C. 285. The complaint demands a jury trial.
What it means
Design patent cases turn on the ordinary-observer comparison of the claimed design as a whole with the accused product, and the total-profits remedy of section 289 is available only for design patents. The complaint pleads pre-suit notice by emails and letters, which bears on its willfulness allegation.
What to watch next
Watch for Katana's answer, any preliminary injunction motion, and whether Katana relies on prior art wheel designs to narrow the comparison.