Case Highlight｜Attorney Deng intervened one day before the default motion in a U.S. TRO case, settling a $130,000 frozen patent dispute for $2,000 within 24 hours.

Case Summary

• Case Number: Confidential

• Jurisdiction: State of Florida, USA

• Case Type: Patent Infringement

Recently, Attorney Deng and his team represented a U.S. patent infringement dispute case. The plaintiff in this case filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida against a large number of e-commerce platform stores in the U.S. for patent infringement and successfully obtained the Temporary Restraining Order (TRO) and Preliminary Injunction (PI) issued by the court .

An Amazon seller had their store listing removed and account funds of up to USD 130,000 frozen due to the TRO and PI issued in this case. After thorough communication with us, the seller engaged our firm to handle the case, including litigation response and settlement negotiations.

At the time this seller-client retained our representation, the plaintiff's motion for entry of default had already been granted by the court, leaving only one day before the plaintiff was scheduled to file the motion for default judgment. Without legal intervention to resolve the matter, and with the Black Friday sales period approaching, the client faced the risk of facing an uncertain but potentially substantial default judgment award** and other consequential losses.

Following thorough communication with the client, Attorney Deng, after analyzing issues such as service of process and the actual scale of sales involved, adopted a litigation-response strategy to engage in negotiations with the plaintiff’s counsel. After multiple rounds of discussions conducted throughout the day, a settlement was successfully reached with the plaintiff within 24 hours. The settlement amount was only USD 2,000, equivalent to merely 1.5% of the client’s frozen funds.

This result was far below the client's anticipated settlement or potential liability, significantly reducing the client's dispute resolution costs. In terms of response time, speed of resolution, and final result, this achievement delivered a highly satisfactory outcome that exceeded the client's expectations.

This case summary is provided for informational purposes only. Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes in future matters.