Additional Representative IP Matters

Patent and Brand Enforcement

The firm also represents patent and brand owners, including Chinese manufacturers whose products are copied by competitors, in enforcement actions in U.S. district courts, at the Patent Office, and through online-marketplace programs.
Electric off-road motorcycles. Counsel for the design patent owner in Qiulong v. E Ride Pro Inc., No. 8:26-cv-00067 (C.D. Cal.) and Qiulong v. Xinghai Hi-Tech, No. 8:26-cv-00061 (C.D. Cal.).
Robotic lawn mowers. Counsel for the patent owner in Mammotion v. FutureGen Technologies Inc., No. 1:25-cv-01945 (D.D.C.) and No. 9:25-cv-81326 (S.D. Fla.).
Pain-relief devices. Counsel for the patent owner in Hi-Dow IPHC, Inc. v. TruePulse, LLC, No. 3:24-cv-00295 (S.D. Tex.) and Hi-Dow IPHC, Inc. v. Hong Qiangxing (Shenzhen) Electronics, No. 2:26-cv-00649 (E.D. Tex.).
Hoverboard design patents. Counsel for the patent owner in E-Link Technology Co. v. Shenzhen Uni-Sun Electronics Co., No. 1:20-cv-00247 (N.D. Ill.).
Challenging competitors' patents. Counsel for petitioners in America Ugreen Limited v. Sariana LLC, PGR2026-00062 (U.S. Patent No. 12,436,567); Danxiao Information Technology Ltd. v. Shenzhen Svakom Technology Co., PGR2022-00050; and Shenzhen Carku Technology Co. v. The NOCO Company, IPR2020-00944.
 
Patent Defense in U.S. District Courts

Networking equipment. Defending a Chinese router manufacturer in TP-Link Systems Inc. v. Shenzhen Cudy Technology Co., No. 2:25-cv-00057 (D. Nev.), an ongoing patent dispute involving router technology.
Personal electric vehicles. Counsel in Phantom E-Moto Inc. v. ZouCheng DeLiGuan Trading, No. 2:26-cv-02219 (W.D. Wash.).
Consumer electronics and e-commerce brands. Represented a portable jump-starter maker against The NOCO Company in the Northern District of Ohio (No. 1:20-cv-00049) and the Central District of California (Gooloo v. Pilot, Inc., Nos. 2:21-cv-08915, 2:22-cv-02219); a consumer-electronics accessories company in Voltstar Technologies v. Ugreen, No. 2:24-cv-01271 (W.D. Wash.); a photography-equipment company in Neewer v. Guangdong Sirui Optical, No. 1:26-cv-01770 (N.D. Ill.); and defendants in Telebrands Corp. v. Yangjiang New Sports Technology Products, No. 1:26-cv-01472 (W.D. Tex.), Seventh Coast Ventures v. Xiamen Daysun Industrial, No. 4:22-cv-04474 (S.D. Tex.), and HP Inc. v. Wiseta, No. 4:23-cv-00344 (N.D. Cal.).
Display technology. Represented a Chinese LCD panel manufacturer in Vista Peak Ventures, LLC v. HKC Corporation Limited, No. 2:20-cv-00352 (E.D. Tex.), an LCD patent case.
Industrial connectors. Counsel in Harting Electric Stiftung & Co. KG v. Phoenix Contact GmbH & Co. KG, No. 4:26-cv-03352 (S.D. Tex.).
Software and platforms. Counsel in Mistwood Partnership v. DocuSign, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-00187 (D. Del.); represented a global e-commerce platform in Spears v. Alibaba, No. 2:24-cv-00527 (D.N.M.); and a Chinese cloud-services company as appellant in Beijing Neu Cloud v. IBM, No. 22-3132 (2d Cir. 2024), a trade secret appeal.
 
ITC Section 337 Investigations

•    Certain Glass Substrates for Liquid Crystal Displays, Products Containing the Same, and Methods for Manufacturing the Same, Inv. Nos. 337-TA-1433 and 337-TA-1441 (2024–2025) — counsel for respondents in paired investigations concerning LCD glass substrate manufacturing.
•    Counsel in Certain Liquid Crystal Devices, Components Thereof, and Products Containing Same, Inv. No. 337-TA-1462 (2025).
•    Counsel in Certain Disposable Vaporizer Devices, Inv. No. 337-TA-1410 (2024).

PTAB Proceedings

The firm files and defends inter partes and post-grant review petitions, typically in coordination with parallel district court or ITC proceedings. Beyond the petitions described in the featured matters and the enforcement section above:
•    Dong Guan Leafy Windoware Co. v. Anli Spring Co., PGR2020-00001.
•    Shenzhen Silver Star Intelligent Technology Co. v. iRobot Corporation, IPR2018-00761, -00880, -00882, -00897, -00898 — five petitions against robotic vacuum patents asserted at the ITC.
•    Wisely Products LLC v. Telebrands Corporation, PGR2018-00003 (U.S. Patent No. 9,546,775).

Federal Circuit and Other Appeals

•    ABC Corporation I v. The Partnership and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A (Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology v. Gyroor), No. 24-1472 (Fed. Cir.), following the Federal Circuit's 2022 decision vacating the preliminary injunction against the firm's clients, 52 F.4th 934.
•    Counsel in Raffel Systems, LLC v. Bob's Discount Furniture LLC, No. 22-1703 (Fed. Cir. 2022).
•    Shenzhen Silver Star Intelligent Technology v. iRobot Corporation, Nos. 19-1101, -1103, -1104, -1109, -1111 (Fed. Cir.) — five appeals from the PTAB decisions in the iRobot matters.
•    Beijing Neu Cloud Oriental System Technology Co. v. International Business Machines Corp., No. 22-3132 (2d Cir. 2024) — trade secret appeal, counsel for plaintiff-appellant.

Design Patent, Trademark, and Online Marketplace Matters

Hoverboard design patents. Defended a group of online sellers in Hangzhou Chic Intelligent Technology Co. v. Partnerships and Unincorporated Associations Identified on Schedule A (ABC Corp. I), No. 1:20-cv-04806 (N.D. Ill.). The Federal Circuit vacated the preliminary injunction against the firm's clients (52 F.4th 934 (Fed. Cir. 2022)); the district court then denied the renewed injunction after an evidentiary hearing (2022 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 223212) and later granted summary judgment of non-infringement (2024). Related: Unicorn Global, Inc. v. E-Link Technology Co., No. 1:20-cv-04127 (N.D. Ill.).
Schedule A defense. Regular counsel for manufacturers and sellers named in Schedule A actions in the Northern District of Illinois and elsewhere, including Roadget Business Pte. Ltd. v. Individuals (Nos. 1:23-cv-17036, 1:24-cv-00115, 1:24-cv-00607, 1:24-cv-03139), Kuiper Ventures LLC v. Individuals, No. 1:25-cv-14403, Xavork Wooliand Inc. v. Defendants Identified in Schedule A, No. 1:23-cv-03371, and Seventh Coast Ventures v. Individuals, No. 4:22-cv-04474 (S.D. Tex.), obtaining dismissals, bond returns, and fee awards in individual cases.
 
Selected TTAB Matters

Arch & Lake represents trademark owners, applicants, petitioners, and respondents in opposition and cancellation proceedings before the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board. Representative matters include:
TTARTISAN — Opposition No. 91269179
Represented the applicant in an opposition involving the TTARTISAN mark. The TTAB dismissed the opposition with prejudice.
KÓZED — Opposition No. 91298394
Represented the opposer in an opposition involving the KÓZED mark. Following the applicant’s default, the TTAB sustained the opposition and the challenged application was abandoned.
UNIFUL — Cancellation No. 92086512
Represented the petitioner in a cancellation proceeding involving the UNIFUL registration. Following the registrant’s default, the TTAB granted the petition and the registration was cancelled.
JORAIR — Cancellation No. 92085406
Represented the petitioner in a cancellation proceeding involving the JORAIR registration. Following the registrant’s default, the TTAB granted the petition and the registration was cancelled.
PONPON — Opposition No. 91292942
Represented the opposer in an opposition involving the PONPON mark. The matter was resolved through an agreement under which the applicant deleted an entire International Class from its application.
GO2CRAFT — Opposition No. 91285147
Represented the applicant in an opposition involving the GO2CRAFT mark. The parties resolved the proceeding by agreement, and the application proceeded to registration.
DREAMDASH — Opposition No. 91302182
Represented the applicant in an opposition involving the DREAMDASH mark. The parties resolved the proceeding by agreement, the opposition was dismissed, and the application proceeded to registration.
​
Discuss an IP Matter

If your company is evaluating, enforcing, or defending intellectual property rights—or facing a patent, trademark, copyright, trade secret, ITC, PTAB, or TTAB matter—contact our team to discuss the next steps.
 
Email: info@archlakelaw.com
​
Results depend on the facts and circumstances of each matter and do not guarantee a similar outcome.