DCT
8:25-cv-02494
P P Imports LLC v. Vevor Store LLC
Key Events
Complaint
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- P&P Imports LLC v. Vevor Store LLC, et al.
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Hankin Patent Law, A Professional Corporation
- Case Identification: 8:25-cv-02494, C.D. Cal., 11/06/2025
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Central District of California because multiple defendant entities reside, maintain principal places of business, and have regular and established places of business within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s sports training products, including various practice nets and a golf training mat, infringe six of Plaintiff's design patents.
- Technical Context: The dispute is in the consumer sporting goods and outdoor recreation market, where ornamental product design can be a significant market differentiator.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges a detailed history of pre-suit interactions, including a cease and desist letter sent in February 2025, to which Defendant Vevor allegedly responded by acknowledging the infringement and promising to cease sales. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant instead continued and expanded its infringing activities, in some cases under a new brand name ("SKYHALO") and by altering product imagery in online listings to conceal the Vevor brand. A second cease and desist letter was allegedly sent in July 2025.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2018-10-24 | Earliest Priority Date for ’933, ’985, and ’355 Patents |
| 2020-11-03 | ’933 Patent Issued |
| 2021-04-28 | Priority Date for ’254 Patent |
| 2021-05-13 | Priority Date for ’214 Patent |
| 2022-08-16 | ’985 Patent Issued |
| 2023-07-31 | Priority Date for ’263 Patent |
| 2023-10-31 | ’355 Patent Issued |
| 2024-01-23 | ’214 Patent Issued |
| 2024-10-22 | ’254 Patent Issued |
| 2024-11-12 | ’263 Patent Issued |
| 2025-02-28 | Plaintiff allegedly sent first Cease and Desist letter to Defendant |
| 2025-07-23 | Plaintiff allegedly sent second Cease and Desist letter to Defendant |
| 2025-11-06 | Complaint Filing Date |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Design Patent No. D1,051,263 - "Sport Training Net," issued November 12, 2024
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: Design patents protect the ornamental appearance of an article of manufacture rather than addressing a technical problem. The article is a net intended for sports training, such as baseball or softball pitching practice (Compl. ¶ 44).
- The Patented Solution: The patent claims the ornamental design for a sport training net, the key features of which are a generally rectangular frame holding a net that features a three-by-three grid of nine distinct, square-shaped target pockets ('263 Patent, FIG. 1-2). Each pocket is depicted with a V-shaped upper opening ('263 Patent, FIG. 2).
- Technical Importance: The specific visual arrangement of target pockets creates a distinct aesthetic for a common type of athletic training equipment (Compl. ¶ 43).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts the single claim of the patent (Compl. ¶ 202). Design patents contain a single claim for the ornamental design as shown in the drawings.
- The essential ornamental features of the design include:
- A generally rectangular overall shape.
- A three-by-three grid of nine target pockets.
- Each pocket having a generally square shape with a V-shaped upper opening.
- The specific proportions and arrangement of these elements as illustrated in the patent figures.
U.S. Design Patent No. D1,048,254 - "Sports Net," issued October 22, 2024
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent covers the ornamental design for a sports net, an article used for activities such as baseball, softball, or golf practice (Compl. ¶ 49).
- The Patented Solution: The claimed design is for a sports net characterized by a large, upright frame with visibly curved upper and lower members and relatively straight side members ('254 Patent, FIG. 1-2). A prominent, centrally-located hexagonal target area or opening is a defining feature of the design's appearance ('254 Patent, FIG. 1).
- Technical Importance: The combination of a bowed frame structure with a contrasting geometric target in the center provides a distinctive overall visual impression for a portable practice net (Compl. ¶ 48).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The complaint asserts the single claim of the patent (Compl. ¶ 210).
- The essential ornamental features of the design include:
- A net-filled frame with bowed top and bottom members.
- A central, regular hexagonal opening or target area.
- The specific visual relationship and proportions between the frame and the hexagonal target as depicted in the patent figures.
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Design Patent No. D900,933
- Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D900,933, "Football Toss Trainer," issued November 3, 2020.
- Technology Synopsis: This patent protects the ornamental design for a football training net. The design features a rectangular frame with three vertically-aligned, recessed target pockets, where the central pocket is positioned slightly lower than the other two ('933 Patent, FIG. 1).
- Asserted Claims: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶ 218).
- Accused Features: Vevor’s 8x8 ft, 7x7 ft, and 6x6 ft "Football Trainer Throwing Net" products are accused of infringing this design (Compl. ¶¶ 85, 218-219).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Design Patent No. D960,985
- Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D960,985, "Toss Trainer," issued August 16, 2022.
- Technology Synopsis: The patent claims an ornamental design for a toss trainer that is visually similar to the '933 Patent. It consists of a rectangular frame with three vertically-aligned target pockets, with slight variations in the depiction of the pockets and frame curvature from the '933 Patent design ('985 Patent, FIG. 1).
- Asserted Claims: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶ 226).
- Accused Features: The same Vevor football net products are accused of infringing this patent (Compl. ¶¶ 85, 226-227).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Design Patent No. D1,003,355
- Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D1,003,355, "Toss Trainer," issued October 31, 2023.
- Technology Synopsis: This patent also protects an ornamental design for a toss trainer featuring a rectangular frame and three vertically-aligned target pockets ('355 Patent, FIG. 1). The design presents another variation on the theme of the '933 and '985 patents.
- Asserted Claims: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶ 234).
- Accused Features: The same Vevor football net products are accused of infringing this patent (Compl. ¶¶ 85, 234-235).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Design Patent No. D1,012,214
- Patent Identification: U.S. Design Patent No. D1,012,214, "Sports Pylon," issued January 23, 2024.
- Technology Synopsis: This patent covers the ornamental design for a sports pylon, an article intended for use as a golf swing path guide (Compl. ¶ 62). The design consists of an elongated, hexagonal pylon that tapers slightly towards its top ('214 Patent, FIG. 1, 3).
- Asserted Claims: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶ 242).
- Accused Features: Vevor’s "5x4ft Golf Hitting Mat," which is depicted as including several such pylons, is accused of infringing this design (Compl. ¶¶ 86, 103, 243).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentalities are various sports training products sold by Defendant Vevor, collectively referred to in the complaint as the "Infringing Nets" and the "Infringing Mat" (Compl. ¶¶ 85, 86, 18).
Functionality and Market Context
- The accused products are functional sports training equipment, including a "9 Hole Baseball Net," a "Baseball Softball Practice Net," several sizes of "Football Trainer Throwing Net," and a "Golf Hitting Mat" that includes sports pylons (Compl. ¶¶ 85, 86). The complaint alleges these products are sold through numerous online retail channels, including Amazon.com, Vevor.com, and HomeDepot.com (Compl. ¶ 90). The complaint further alleges that the accused products are "direct cop[ies]" of Plaintiff's patented designs but are manufactured with "lower quality materials and construction" (Compl. ¶¶ 91, 92, 95, 96). A side-by-side visual in the complaint compares Plaintiff's patented design for a sports pylon with an enlarged image of the pylons included with Vevor's accused "Swing Path Mat" (Compl. p. 22).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
'263 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from the Design Claim) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| The ornamental design for a sport training net, as shown and described. | Defendant’s “9 Hole Baseball Net” products are alleged to be “a direct copy” of the patented design. The complaint provides a visual comparison showing the accused products embody the same three-by-three grid of nine square pockets within a rectangular frame. | ¶¶ 91, 203 | ’263 Patent, FIG. 1 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: The central infringement question for a design patent is whether an ordinary observer, familiar with the prior art, would be deceived into purchasing the accused product believing it to be the patented design. The complaint's allegation that the accused products are "direct cop[ies]" frames the dispute as one of near-identicality (Compl. ¶ 91). The issue for the court will be whether any minor differences between the products and the patent drawings are sufficient to escape infringement.
- Visual Comparison Questions: The complaint includes a side-by-side visual comparison of the patent figure and three of Vevor's accused nets (Compl. p. 19). The resolution of the dispute may depend on whether this visual evidence accurately represents the products and if any differences in materials, branding, or
subtle proportions, not apparent in the provided images, distinguish the overall visual appearance of the accused products from the patented design.
'254 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from the Design Claim) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| The ornamental design for a sports net, as shown and described. | Defendant's "Baseball Softball Practice Net" is alleged to be a "direct copy" of the patented design. A visual comparison in the complaint shows the accused product embodying the same overall shape, including the bowed top and bottom frame members and the central hexagonal target area. | ¶¶ 95, 211 | ’254 Patent, FIG. 1 |
- Identified Points of Contention:
- Scope Questions: As with the ’263 patent, the analysis will turn on the ordinary observer test. The question is whether the overall visual impression of Vevor’s net is substantially the same as that of the claimed design.
- Visual Comparison Questions: The complaint provides a side-by-side comparison of the patent drawing and the accused Vevor product (Compl. p. 20). An issue for determination will be the significance of any differences not emphasized in the complaint, such as the color of the hexagonal target's border, which appears as red-orange on the Vevor product but is unclaimed line art in the patent.
V. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint includes allegations that Defendant infringed by "aiding, assisting, and encouraging the infringement" of the asserted patents by others (Compl. ¶¶ 202, 213, 218, 226, 234, 242).
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on Defendant's conduct after receiving notice of its alleged infringement (Compl. ¶ 206). The allegations state that Plaintiff sent a cease and desist letter on February 28, 2025, and that Defendant acknowledged the infringement and promised to stop (Compl. ¶¶ 31-32). The complaint alleges Defendant then "deliberately took steps to relist and resume the sale of identically infringing products," expanded its infringing product lines, and attempted to conceal its activity by selling under a new brand ("SKYHALO") and digitally removing the "VEVOR" logo from product images in online listings (Compl. ¶¶ 33, 107, 111-112). The complaint provides photographic evidence comparing a product listing with the logo removed to the actual product received from a test-buy, which clearly displays the "VEVOR" logo (Compl. p. 24).
VI. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A core issue will be one of visual identity: are the accused Vevor sports nets and training aids "substantially the same" as the designs claimed in the six asserted patents from the perspective of an ordinary observer? The complaint's numerous side-by-side visual comparisons suggest a high degree of similarity, positioning this as the central question for infringement liability.
- A key evidentiary question will be one of willfulness and intent: does the alleged pre-suit notice, acknowledgement of infringement, and subsequent continuation and alleged concealment of sales constitute willful infringement? The evidence related to the rebranding to "SKYHALO" and the alleged digital alteration of marketing images will likely be central to determining whether Defendant's conduct was objectively reckless, which could expose it to claims for enhanced damages.