DCT
1:25-cv-10063
Dyson Technology Ltd v. Partnerships Unincorp Associations
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: Dyson Technology Ltd (United Kingdom)
- Defendant: The Partnerships Unincorp Associations Identified on Schedule A (People's Republic of China or other foreign jurisdictions)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd.
- Case Identification: 1:25-cv-10063, N.D. Ill., 08/22/2025
- Venue Allegations: Venue is based on allegations that Defendants operate interactive e-commerce stores that target and make sales to consumers in Illinois.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that numerous unidentified online retailers are selling hair styling apparatus that infringe the ornamental designs protected by two of its U.S. design patents.
- Technical Context: The dispute concerns the ornamental appearance of high-end consumer hair care appliances, a market where distinctive product design is a significant driver of brand recognition and value.
- Key Procedural History: This action is brought against a group of unidentified "Schedule A" defendants, a litigation strategy commonly used to combat diffuse networks of online sellers, often based overseas, who allegedly sell counterfeit or infringing goods.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 2017-05-30 | Earliest Priority Date (D853,642 and D852,415 Patents) |
| 2019-06-25 | U.S. Patent No. D852,415 Issued |
| 2019-07-09 | U.S. Patent No. D853,642 Issued |
| 2025-08-22 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Design Patent No. D853,642 - "Hair Styling and Hair Care Apparatus," issued July 9, 2019
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The complaint suggests that in the consumer appliance market, establishing a unique and recognizable product appearance is critical to conveying brand identity and quality to the public (Compl. ¶5, ¶8).
- The Patented Solution: This patent protects the specific ornamental design for a hair styling apparatus. The claimed design consists of a long, cylindrical main body, a textured grip section near the power cord, a pair of small circular buttons on the body, and a distinctive tapered tip with fluted or grooved channels (’642 Patent, FIG. 1, 3, 6). The overall aesthetic is one of a sleek, modern, wand-like tool.
- Technical Importance: The complaint alleges these product designs are "broadly recognized by consumers" and have become associated with the quality and innovation expected from the Dyson brand (Compl. ¶8).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The patent contains a single claim for "The ornamental design for a hair styling and hair care apparatus, as shown and described" (’642 Patent, CLAIM).
- The key ornamental features defining the design include:
- An elongated, wand-like cylindrical body.
- A tapered end with longitudinal fluted channels.
- A knurled or textured grip band located near the corded end.
- A specific configuration of two circular buttons and one slider switch on the main body.
U.S. Design Patent No. D852,415 - "Hair Styling and Hair Care Apparatus," issued June 25, 2019
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: As with the related patent, this design addresses the need for a distinct visual identity for a consumer product in a competitive field (Compl. ¶5, ¶8).
- The Patented Solution: This patent claims the ornamental design for what appears to be the handle portion of a hair styling apparatus. Key features include the cylindrical body, a specific placement of two circular buttons and a slider switch, a knurled texture on a band near the cord exit, and a perforated end cap design (’415 Patent, FIG. 1, 4, 6). The broken lines in the patent drawings indicate that the cord and the tip of the apparatus are not part of the claimed design, focusing protection on the handle's appearance (’415 Patent, DESCRIPTION).
- Technical Importance: This design constitutes a core part of the overall product aesthetic that the complaint alleges is iconic and instantly recognizable to consumers (Compl. ¶5).
Key Claims at a Glance
- The patent contains a single claim for "The ornamental design for a hair styling and hair care apparatus, as shown and described" (’415 Patent, CLAIM).
- The key ornamental features defining the design include:
- A cylindrical main body or handle.
- A perforated pattern on the flat end cap of the cylinder.
- A textured grip band located at the opposite end from the end cap.
- A specific arrangement of buttons on the main body.
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
- The accused instrumentalities are "hair styling and hair care apparatus" (the "Infringing Products") allegedly sold by the Defendants through various e-commerce stores (Compl. ¶3).
Functionality and Market Context
- The complaint alleges that Defendants operate e-commerce stores on platforms including Amazon, eBay, and AliExpress to sell unauthorized products that embody Dyson's patented designs (Compl. ¶3, ¶12). The complaint asserts these stores are designed to appear as authorized retailers to "unknowing consumers," and that the products sold bear irregularities suggesting they originate from a common unauthorized source (Compl. ¶15, ¶18). The complaint shows a perspective view of the design claimed in the '642 patent, which it alleges is infringed by the Defendants' products (Compl. p. 4).
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
Design patent infringement is determined by the "ordinary observer" test, which asks whether an ordinary observer, familiar with the prior art designs, would be deceived into purchasing the accused product believing it to be the patented one. The complaint alleges that the Infringing Products are visually substantially the same as the patented designs.
D853,642 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (Ornamental Feature) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| The overall ornamental appearance of a wand-like hair styling apparatus | The complaint alleges Defendants sell products that infringe the ornamental designs claimed in the Dyson patents. | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 1-7 |
| Elongated cylindrical body with a stepped-down, fluted tip | The Infringing Products are alleged to incorporate the distinctive visual features of the patented design, creating a substantially similar overall impression. | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 1, 3 |
| Textured grip section near the corded end of the body | The Infringing Products are alleged to incorporate the distinctive visual features of the patented design, creating a substantially similar overall impression. | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 2, 7 |
| A specific arrangement of two circular buttons and a slider switch | The Infringing Products are alleged to incorporate the distinctive visual features of the patented design, creating a substantially similar overall impression. | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 6 |
D852,415 Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (Ornamental Feature) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| The overall ornamental appearance of the handle of a hair styling apparatus | The complaint alleges Defendants sell products that infringe the ornamental designs claimed in the Dyson patents. A figure from the patent is included in the complaint to illustrate the claimed design (Compl. p. 6). | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 1-7 |
| Cylindrical handle with a perforated end cap | The Infringing Products are alleged to incorporate the distinctive visual features of the patented design, creating a substantially similar overall impression. | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 1, 4 |
| Knurled or textured grip band at the opposite end of the handle | The Infringing Products are alleged to incorporate the distinctive visual features of the patented design, creating a substantially similar overall impression. | ¶3, ¶25 | FIG. 2, 3 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Factual Question: The complaint does not contain photographs of the actual "Infringing Products" but rather figures from the patents themselves. The primary factual question will be whether the products actually sold by Defendants are, upon visual inspection, substantially the same as the designs shown in the '642 and '415 patents.
- Scope Questions: The scope of a design patent is limited to the ornamental aspects shown in solid lines in the drawings. A potential point of contention could be whether any differences between the accused products and the patented designs are significant enough to alter the overall visual impression in the eyes of an ordinary observer. For the '415 patent, infringement analysis will focus only on the handle portion, as other elements are shown in broken lines (’415 Patent, DESCRIPTION).
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
As the patents-in-suit are design patents, their claim is defined by the drawings rather than by text. Consequently, claim construction will focus on the overall visual impression of the claimed designs as depicted in the patent figures, and there are no specific textual terms that are likely to require judicial construction.
VI. Other Allegations
- Indirect Infringement: The complaint makes a passing allegation of indirect infringement (Compl. ¶25) and requests an injunction against "aiding, abetting, [or] contributing to" infringement (Prayer ¶1(b)). However, the factual allegations focus on Defendants' own acts of making, using, selling, and importing, which primarily support a claim for direct infringement.
- Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendants' infringement was willful (Compl. ¶22). This allegation is supported by assertions that Defendants acted knowingly and are part of a broader enterprise of online sellers who use tactics to conceal their identities and evade enforcement of intellectual property rights (Compl. ¶11, ¶16-20, ¶21).
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of visual comparison: assuming the accused products can be obtained, are their ornamental designs substantially the same as those claimed in the '642 and '415 patents from the perspective of an ordinary observer, such that the observer would be deceived?
- A key procedural question will be one of enforcement and evidence: given that the defendants are unidentified foreign entities alleged to be operating under aliases, can the plaintiff successfully identify them, effect service, and obtain the specific accused products necessary to prove infringement?
- If infringement is established, a primary question for damages will be the calculation of remedy: can the plaintiff establish the defendants' "total profit" from the infringing sales, which is available as a remedy for design patent infringement under 35 U.S.C. § 289?