CAO Group, Inc. v. Ivoclar Vivadent, Inc.
pending- Docket:
- 1:25-cv-01430
- Court:
- D. Del.
- Filed:
- 2025-11-24
Pending patent infringement action asserting patents including US 11,826,444.
Plaintiff
CAO Group, Inc.
17 cases as plaintiff.
- Cases
- 17
- Active
- 6
- 11 closed
- Filed
- 2022–2025
- Top venue
- N D Ill
- 6 cases
Company profile
I'll research this company now.
Company overview. CAO Group, Inc. is a privately held Utah corporation headquartered at 4628 West Skyhawk Drive, West Jordan, Utah. Founded in 2000 by Dr. Densen Cao, who developed one of the first LED dental curing lights, the company remains private, with no public ticker. PitchBook lists roughly 103 employees and third-party data aggregators place headcount in the 100–250 band and revenue in the $10–50M range; CAO received a ~$677K PPP loan in 2020. Its dental business was consolidated under wholly owned subsidiary AMD Lasers, Inc. in March 2024; related entities include CAO Lighting, Inc. (d/b/a Lumist Oral Care).
Products/operations. CAO is an operating manufacturer, not an NPE. It develops, manufactures, and sells dental devices and consumables from a 60,000 sq. ft. FDA-registered, ISO-certified facility, with a joint-venture manufacturing arm in China. Product lines include soft-tissue diode lasers (Picasso), LED curing lights (Monet), teeth-whitening strips (Sheer White! and VivaStyle-adjacent dentistry channels), digital x-ray sensors, imaging/diagnostics devices, and restorative, endodontic, preventive, infection-control, and accessory products. It sells direct, through distributor Henry Schein, and via distributors outside the US. Divisions have also covered forensic, veterinary, medical, and lighting applications.
Patent-litigation posture. CAO is an active two-way litigant but predominantly a plaintiff asserting its own patents: 6 plaintiff cases versus 1 defendant case in the tracked data. Its suits assert a family of related peroxide-gel/whitening-strip patents (US 10,603,259; 10,646,419; 11,219,582; 11,826,444; 11,826,445) against competitors and online sellers, often via "Schedule A" mass-defendant complaints filed in the N.D. Ill. It is not characterized as an NPE; Stanford's NPE database labels it a "product company."
Notable cases. CAO v. Walmart (D. Utah, 2024) and CAO v. Ivoclar Vivadent (D. Del., 2025) target retail and professional whitening strips. The single defendant-side case, Ranir LLC v. CAO Group (D. Utah, 2024), is a declaratory-judgment action brought by Ranir (a Perrigo subsidiary) seeking non-infringement and invalidity of the same patents. Earlier litigation involved LED-lighting patents against GE Lighting, Osram Sylvania, and others, and a P&G whitening-strip suit against CAO.
Watchlist
Get alerted when CAO Group, Inc. sues again.
Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when CAO Group, Inc. files another patent-infringement lawsuit. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.
Filing activity
CAO Group, Inc. v. [Schedule A defendants] ("Sheer White!")
active- Docket:
- 1:25-cv-14512
- Court:
- N.D. Ill.
- Filed:
- 2025-11-16
CAO Group filed a Schedule A infringement action (nicknamed Sheer White!) in N.D. Ill. asserting the '259 patent, family members '419, '582, '444, and '445, plus design patents D740117, D655163, and D655165. A TRO was granted around Jan. 8, 2026, freezing defendant store accounts/funds.
CAO Group, Inc. v. GuruNanda, LLC
pending- Docket:
- 8:25-cv-02074
- Court:
- C.D. Cal.
- Filed:
- 2025-09-12
Patents:11826444
Pending action identified in Stanford NPE DB and Google Patents litigation list for the '444 patent.
CAO Group, Inc. v. GuruNanda, LLC
pending- Docket:
- 8:25-cv-02074
- Court:
- C.D. Cal.
- Filed:
- 2025-09-12
Patents:11826445
CAO Group sued GuruNanda, LLC in C.D. Cal. The accused product is GuruNanda (whitening strips/oil pulling brand). The case is pending.
CAO Group, Inc. v. GuruNanda, LLC
pending- Docket:
- 8:25-cv-02074
- Court:
- C.D. Cal.
- Filed:
- 2025-09-12
Patents:10646419
CAO Group's pending '419-related suit against GuruNanda, LLC; no publicly reported outcome was identified.
CAO Group, Inc. v. GD-Whitening et al.
default judgment- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-05129
- Court:
- N.D. Ill.
- Filed:
- 2024-06-20
- Terminated:
- 2025-08-06
Willful-infringement default judgment entered against GD-Whitening/Zhuhai Jiashu; treble damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 totaling $1,650,000. Patents at issue included US 11,826,444.
CAO Group, Inc. v. Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands
dismissed voluntarily- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-04903
- Court:
- N.D. Ill.
- Filed:
- 2024-06-13
- Terminated:
- 2024-12-18
Patents:11826444
CAO Group suit against Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands. Patexia lists US 11,826,444 among documents in the case; the complaint excerpt available references the '259 patent. Whether the '444 patent was actually pleaded is unclear. Dismissed voluntarily Dec. 18, 2024.
CAO Group, Inc. v. Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands
dismissed- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-04903
- Court:
- N.D. Ill. (E.D.)
- Filed:
- 2024-06-13
- Terminated:
- 2024-12-18
Patents:11826445
CAO Group sued Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands in N.D. Ill. The accused product was 'Boka Bright + White Sensitive Smile Whitening Strips.' The case was voluntarily dismissed on Dec 18, 2024.
CAO Group, Inc. v. Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands
dismissed voluntarily- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-04903
- Court:
- N.D. Ill.
- Filed:
- 2024-06-13
- Terminated:
- 2024-12-18
Patents:11219582
Infringement suit filed by CAO Group against Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands; dismissed voluntarily on Dec. 18, 2024.
CAO Group, Inc. v. Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands
voluntarily dismissed- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-04903
- Court:
- N.D. Ill. (E.D.)
- Filed:
- 2024-06-13
- Terminated:
- 2024-12-18
Patents:10646419
CAO Group filed suit against Karaka LLC d/b/a The DoubleY Brands; the case was voluntarily dismissed and terminated on December 18, 2024.
CAO Group, Inc. v. Walmart Inc.
dismissed with prejudice- Docket:
- 2:24-cv-00175
- Court:
- D. Utah
- Filed:
- 2024-03-05
CAO Group alleged Walmart infringed patents including US 11,826,444. The case was dismissed with prejudice by stipulated Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) dismissal, each side bearing its own costs and fees.
CAO Group, Inc. v. Walmart
- Court:
- D. Utah
- Filed:
- 2024-03-05
Ranir's DJ complaint stated that CAO Group sued Walmart in the District of Utah on March 5, 2024, asserting at least Claim 1 of the '259 patent and the '419, '582, '444, and '445 patents. The docket number and current status were not confirmed.
CAO Group, Inc. v. The Individuals, Corporations, LLCs, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associates Identified on Schedule "A"
default judgment- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-01211
- Court:
- N.D. Ill.
- Filed:
- 2024-02-12
π CAO Group, Inc.Δ The Individuals, Corporations, LLCs, Partnerships and Unincorporated Associates Identified on Schedule "A"
CAO Group sued Schedule A online sellers. Stanford NPE lists the case as involving US 11,826,444, but the pleaded counts/default-judgment motion referenced only US 10,603,259; 10,646,419; and 11,219,582. Default judgment: $1,518,750 per defaulting defendant (rounded royalty + transaction costs, trebled).
CAO Group, Inc. v. The Individuals, Corporations, ... Identified on Schedule A
active- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-01211
- Court:
- N.D. Ill. (E.D.)
- Filed:
- 2024-02-12
Patents:11826445
CAO Group filed a mass-joinder action in N.D. Ill. against numerous e-commerce seller aliases (e.g., Fairywill, BYS Technology, OETU, Trayknick) identified on Schedule A. This is the case the Stanford NPE Litigation Database identifies as involving the '445 patent. It is the source of the severances that created cases #3 and #4.
CAO Group, Inc. v. The Individuals, Corporations, LLCs, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified on Schedule A
terminated- Docket:
- 1:24-cv-00901
- Filed:
- 2024-02-01
- Terminated:
- 2024-07-01
π CAO Group, Inc.Δ The Individuals, Corporations, LLCs, Partnerships, and Unincorporated Associates Identified on Schedule A
CAO Group filed a sealed Schedule A e-commerce infringement case in N.D. Ill. Secondary TRO-monitoring commentary states the case concerned design patents D740117, D655163, and D655165. A TRO issued Feb. 15, 2024, a preliminary injunction issued Mar. 27, 2024, and a final default judgment on July 1, 2024 awarded $1,003,846.15 per defaulting defendant plus fees; the case terminated.
CAO Group, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Company
dismissed- Docket:
- 5:22-cv-01874
- Court:
- C.D. Cal.
- Filed:
- 2022-10-26
- Terminated:
- 2022-11-14
Patents:11219582
Infringement suit filed by CAO Group against The Procter & Gamble Company and others in C.D. Cal.; dismissed on Nov. 14, 2022.
CAO Group, Inc. v. [Schedule A defendants]
- Docket:
- 1:25-cv-04054
- Court:
- N.D. Ill.
Patents:10603259
CAO Group filed a Schedule A infringement action in N.D. Ill. concerning the '259 patent. Details and outcome are not confirmed.