Certain Powered Rocker-Recliner and Glider-Recliner Mechanisms and Seating Units Containing Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1524 (Violation)
U.S. International Trade Commission
Holding
This supplemental complaint, a redline incorporating a second supplement, restates the Section 337 complaint of Ultra-Mek, Inc., Leggett & Platt, Inc., and L&P Property Management Company against Living Style, the Henglin Respondents, and Carya Smart. It alleges infringement of the '348, '693, '165, and '168 Patents by powered rocker-recliner and glider-recliner mechanisms and seating units.
Why It Matters
The filing targets imported powered recliner mechanisms and finished seating units, including Barcalounger- and COLAMY-branded products built with Carya Smart mechanisms. Complainants seek permanent limited exclusion orders, cease-and-desist orders, and a bond during Presidential review. The second supplement appears to add or update respondents and infringement allegations, but the redline does not show what changed.
Full Summary
Key Points
- Complainants: Ultra-Mek (owner of the '348 and '693 Patents) and Leggett & Platt and L&P Property Management Company (owner of the '165 and '168 Patents).
- Proposed respondents: Living Style entities, the Henglin entities (including Nanjing Hengning, Zhejiang Hengjian, Colamy, Aurora Maison, and Aerisnexus), and Jiangsu Carya Smart.
- Accused products: Carya Smart 5115 powered-rocker and 7115 powered-glider mechanisms and seating units incorporating them, such as Barcalounger and COLAMY recliners.
- Infringement is alleged literally and/or under the doctrine of equivalents, with direct infringement under 271(a), inducement under 271(b), and contributory infringement by Carya Smart.
- Domestic industry is alleged under Section 337(a)(3)(A), (B), and (C), based on Ultra-Mek's North Carolina manufacturing and L&P's U.S. facilities, with the 7800/7900-series and Delta, CZ, BEST, and EZ-Pro lines as domestic industry products.
- Relief requested: institution of an investigation, a violation finding, permanent limited exclusion orders, cease-and-desist orders, and a bond during the 60-day Presidential review period.
Related Documents
- Complaint · 337-TA-1524 · August 21, 2026Certain Powered Rocker-Recliner and Glider-Recliner Mechanisms and Seating Units Containing Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1524 (Violation)
- Supplemental Complaint · 337-TA-1524 · September 9, 2026Certain Powered Rocker-Recliner and Glider-Recliner Mechanisms and Seating Units Containing Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1524 (Violation)
- Notice of Investigation · 337-TA-1524 · September 23, 2026Certain Powered Rocker-Recliner and Glider-Recliner Mechanisms and Seating Units Containing Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-1524
How this summary was made: Drafted with AI from the Commission's document; before publishing, code checked that the quotation and the citations it gives appear in that document. Editorial policy
New to District court litigation? Start with PTAB vs. District Court: Where to Challenge a Patent’s Validity
- ITC · Oct. 27, 2026Certain Wearable Activity and Health Monitoring Devices and Systems Containing Same; Inv. No. 337-TA-3937 (Violation)
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 26, 2026Gurvey v. Live Nation Entertainment, Inc.
- ITC · Oct. 26, 2026Certain Adjustable Child Carriers and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1514
- Fed. Cir. · Oct. 23, 2026In re Carter
- ITC · Oct. 16, 2026Certain Storage Containers and Toolboxes, Organizers, Component Boxes, Coolers, and Accessories Used Therewith; Inv. No. 337-TA-1409 (Violation)
