Certain Adjustable Child Carriers and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1514 (Violation)
U.S. International Trade Commission
Holding
This amended complaint, filed under Order No. 15 granting leave to amend, has The Ergo Baby Carrier, Inc. (Ergobaby) accusing twelve respondents of importing and selling adjustable child carriers that infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 10,426,275 and 12,016,470. The amendment adds Xiamen Danke Health Technology Co., Ltd. as a proposed respondent.
Why It Matters
The complaint targets Mabe, Nest Blanche/Zoe, Portier, Ava & Oliver and Artipoppe soft-structured baby carriers, which Ergobaby says compete directly with its Omni Family. It seeks a permanent limited exclusion order and cease and desist orders, which could bar these carriers from the U.S. market. Adding Xiamen Danke widens the supply chain reached by the investigation.
Full Summary
Key Points
- Complainant Ergobaby, a Hawaii corporation based in Torrance, California, names twelve proposed respondents in three groups: the Mabe, Xiamen New Baby and Artipoppe/Bugaboo respondents.
- Asserted patents are the '275 Patent (claims 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 12, 16, 17) and the '470 Patent (claims 1, 6-11, 17, 18, 22-25), both titled Adjustable Child Carrier and invented by Rodney V. Telford.
- Accused products are the Mabe Monarch, Nest Blanche/Zoe, Portier Limitless, Ava & Oliver Essential and Artipoppe Zeitgeist carriers, which the complaint says are made in China and imported or sold after importation.
- The amendment adds Xiamen Danke, alleged to be a sister company of Xiamen New Baby under common control by Wei Haixia, and cites confidential interrogatory responses.
- Domestic industry rests on the Omni Family carriers, with claimed U.S. plant and equipment, labor and capital, and engineering and R&D investments supported by the Stein declaration.
- Relief sought is a permanent limited exclusion order, cease and desist orders, and a bond during the Presidential review period.
Related Documents
- Supplemental Complaint · 337-TA-1514 · July 7, 2026Certain Adjustable Child Carriers and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1514 (Violation)
- Notice of Investigation · 337-TA-1514 · July 22, 2026Certain Adjustable Child Carriers and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1514
- Supplemental Complaint · 337-TA-1514 · June 23, 2026Certain Adjustable Child Carriers and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1514 (Violation)
- Notice of Investigation · 337-TA-1514 · October 26, 2026Certain Adjustable Child Carriers and Components Thereof; Inv. No. 337-TA-1514
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)
