Hong Kong Xingtai Intl Trade Co Ltd v. T Schedule A

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Hong Kong Xingtai International Trade Co. Ltd. (Hong Kong)
  • Defendant: The Individuals, Corporations, Limited Liability Companies, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified on Schedule “A”
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Bishop Diehl & Lee, Ltd.
• Case Identification: 1:23-cv-15481, N.D. Ill., 11/08/2023
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged based on Defendants structuring their business activities to target consumers in the United States, including Illinois, through interactive e-commerce stores.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ online sale of solar-powered decorative string lights infringes a patent related to self-contained, automatically operating outdoor lighting systems.
• Technical Context: The technology at issue is solar-powered LED string lighting, a widely adopted consumer product category for outdoor and decorative use.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint is an action against a large number of unidentified online sellers, listed on a "Schedule A," a procedural approach often used to combat diffuse infringement by entities that allegedly use multiple aliases to evade enforcement. The complaint alleges Plaintiff marks its own products with the patent number.

Case Timeline

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7,819,545, "Outdoor Solar Decorative Lights," issued October 26, 2010.

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes the problems associated with conventional, plug-in outdoor decorative lights, including the "very real danger of electrical shorts and shocks" when used in outdoor conditions and the hazard of tripping over long extension cords (’545 Patent, col. 1:35-46).
• The Patented Solution: The invention is a self-contained, solar-powered lighting system that eliminates the need for external power sources and extension cords. As shown in Figure 1 of the patent, it combines a flexible string of lights with a dedicated solar collector unit, which houses solar panels, a rechargeable battery, and a switch that automatically turns the lights on at dusk and off at dawn (’545 Patent, col. 2:24-39). This integrated design is intended to provide a convenient, safe, and easy-to-install alternative to traditional lighting.
• Technical Importance: This approach obviates the need for cumbersome extension cords and reduces electricity costs, thereby offering homeowners enhanced convenience, reliability, and safety for a common decorative application (’545 Patent, col. 2:46-53).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts infringement of at least independent Claim 1 (Compl. ¶30).
• The essential elements of independent Claim 1 are:
  • An outdoor decorative solar powered lighting system, comprising
  • a flexible, elongated light string;
  • an electrical wire extending through the light string and commensurate in length therewith;
  • a plurality of sockets mounted on the light string and spaced evenly therealong;
  • a plurality of light bulbs mounted to the sockets;
  • a solar collector electrically connected to the light string;
  • the solar collector including a housing and at least one solar panel supported in the housing;
  • a rechargeable battery contained within the housing and electrically connected to the solar panel; and
  • a regulator switch electrically interconnected to the battery and light string for automatically switching the light bulbs on and off, whereby the switch is in an open state from sunrise to sunset and an automatic closed state upon sunset.
• The complaint notes that dependent claims 2-3 stem from Claim 1 and reserves the right to assert that Defendants have infringed "each and every claim of the '545 Patent" (Compl. ¶9, ¶30).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The accused instrumentalities are "Unauthorized Products," identified as outdoor decorative solar-powered string lights (Compl. ¶2, ¶3).

Functionality and Market Context

• The complaint alleges that Defendants sell these products through numerous e-commerce stores on platforms including Amazon, eBay, and Temu (Compl. ¶14). A representative product listing provided in the complaint describes a solar string light system with an included solar panel and an automatic on/off function. A screenshot from an Amazon listing shows an accused product described as having a "Solar energy supply" and a "Light sensor [that] controls the solar globe lights auto on at dark and auto off at daytime" (Compl. p. 5, Fig. 1). The complaint alleges these products are sold by a network of infringers who use multiple aliases to conceal their identities and evade enforcement actions (Compl. ¶3, ¶22).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'545 Patent Infringement Allegations

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Evidentiary Questions: A central challenge in this type of case is evidentiary. The complaint alleges that numerous online storefronts, operating under different aliases, are part of an interrelated infringing network (Compl. ¶23). A point of contention will be whether Plaintiff can produce sufficient evidence to link each specific product sold by each Defendant to the claim limitations.
  • Technical Questions: The infringement analysis may focus on the "regulator switch" element. The question will be whether the "Light sensor" functionality described for the accused products (Compl. p. 5, Fig. 1) performs the specific two-state switching function recited in the claim—being "disposed to the open state from sunrise to sunset" and "automatically going to the closed state upon sunset"—or if there is a technical distinction in its operation.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "regulator switch"

• Context and Importance: This term defines the automatic "on at dusk, off at dawn" feature, which is a core functional aspect of the invention. The construction of this term will determine what types of light-sensing circuits fall within the scope of the claim.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the element as an "on/off current regulator switch 66" that functions through the "detection or non-detection of ambient light" (’545 Patent, col. 5:15-18). This general, functional language could support a construction that encompasses any light-sensing circuit that achieves the claimed result.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim requires the switch to be in an "open state from sunrise to sunset" and a "closed state upon sunset." A defendant could argue this implies a distinct binary function. The specification also mentions the switch can be "adjusted seasonally" (’545 Patent, col. 5:19-20), which might be used to argue for a more sophisticated mechanism than a simple photocell.

• The Term: "spaced evenly therealong"

• Context and Importance: This term describes the physical arrangement of the lights. Practitioners may focus on this term because if an accused product can be shown to have intentionally irregular spacing, it might be argued to fall outside the literal scope of the claim.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification simply states that "Evenly spaced therealong are a plurality of receptacles or sockets" without further definition, suggesting the term is descriptive rather than a strict, mathematically precise limitation (’545 Patent, col. 4:21-22). This could support a reading that allows for standard manufacturing tolerances.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: A defendant could argue that "evenly" is a material limitation intended to distinguish the invention from lights with random or deliberately varied spacing, and that a product without substantially equidistant sockets does not infringe.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint pleads indirect infringement by alleging Defendants are "working in active concert" (Compl. ¶29) and requests an injunction against "Aiding, abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in infringing" the patent (Compl., Prayer for Relief ¶1(b)).
• Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that infringement "has been and continues to be willful" (Compl. ¶34). This allegation is based on the assertion that Defendants operate in a way designed to evade detection and that Plaintiff provides notice of its patent rights on its own products, packaging, and online listings (Compl. ¶11, ¶12, ¶22). A screenshot of an accused product listing that appears to include Plaintiff's patent number is provided as evidence (Compl. p. 5, Fig. 1).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

• A core issue will be one of proof and attribution: can the Plaintiff successfully produce evidence linking each of the numerous, anonymous online storefronts listed in Schedule A to the sale of products that practice every element of the asserted claim, or will the corporate and operational separation between the sellers frustrate enforcement?
• A key technical question will be one of functional operation: what level of evidence will be required to demonstrate that the "light sensor" circuits in the accused products perform the specific, two-state ("open" from sunrise to sunset, "closed" upon sunset) automatic function of the claimed "regulator switch", particularly for products that cannot be physically inspected before discovery?