Case Highlight | Represented Cross-Border E-Commerce Seller in U.S. Schedule A Patent Suit: Dismissed Without Liability
- LawMay
- Jan 6
- 2 min read
Updated: Jan 7

Recently, Attorney Deng’s team represented a client in a Schedule A invention patent infringement lawsuit before the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, successfully securing a ruling of dismissal with no liability for the Chinese cross-border e-commerce seller, who was thus exempt from any legal responsibility.
The court also denied the plaintiff’s motion for a Preliminary Injunction. The client’s frozen account funds have been unfrozen, and its business operations have returned to normal.
The case was jointly filed by the plaintiff against more than 80 Chinese sellers, alleging invention patent infringement and seeking asset freezing, product link takedowns, a preliminary injunction and damages. Attorney Deng represented one of the sellers in the defense.
In the case, Attorney Deng’s team argued that there was no legal nexus between the client and other defendants, failing to satisfy the requirements for joinder of actions. Pursuant to Section 299 of the America Invents Act , the team asserted a defense against misjoinder before the court. Meanwhile, the team also challenged the court’s jurisdiction and opposed the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction.
After trial, the court adopted the defense arguments put forward by Attorney Deng, ruling to dismiss the client from the case with no liability whatsoever. The court also denied the plaintiff’s request for a preliminary injunction, and the client’s account was subsequently unfrozen.
Against the backdrop of the frequent occurrence of Schedule A lawsuits nowadays, Attorney Deng has analyzed the characteristics of such cases, summarized the potential procedural defects and substantive legal issues involved in similar cases, and provided an operable and replicable successful defense paradigm for U.S. Schedule A lawsuits.
This case summary is provided for informational purposes only. Past results do not guarantee similar outcomes in future matters.



Comments