Champion Power Equipment Incorporated v. Firman Power Equipment Incorporated

Champion Power Equipment Incorporated initiated this patent infringement lawsuit against Firman Power Equipment Incorporated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona on November 10, 2023. Champion Power Equipment, the plaintiff, is a prominent operating company and market leader in the power generation equipment industry, headquartered in Las Vegas, Nevada, with facilities across North America. They design and manufacture a wide range of products including portable and home standby generators, inverters, and engines. The defendant, Firman Power Equipment, also an operating company, is a portable generator manufacturer based in Peoria, Arizona, and is recognized as one of the world's largest generator producers. Firman is a subsidiary of SUMEC Group Inc., which is part of the China National Machinery Industry Corporation.

The core of the dispute centers on Firman's allegedly infringing portable generators, particularly those with dual-fuel or multi-fuel capabilities. The primary patent asserted in this litigation is U.S. Patent No. 11,840,970. This patent broadly covers "Generator engine systems" and more specifically pertains to a "mechanical fuel lockout switch for a dual fuel engine," which allows for the selective control of fuel flow from multiple sources to the engine. The case is being presided over by Judge Dominic W. Lanza in the District of Arizona. This venue is geographically relevant as both companies have significant operations and market presence in the Western United States, with Firman being based directly in Peoria, Arizona. The procedural posture indicates an active and ongoing case, having seen various discovery disputes and motions to amend contentions, suggesting it is still in the discovery and claim construction phases.

This case is notable due to the competitive landscape of the portable generator market, where both Champion and Firman are significant players. The litigation highlights the strategic importance of intellectual property in multi-fuel generator technology, a key innovation providing versatility to consumers. Furthermore, the case is linked to Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings; specifically, the '970 patent was challenged in IPR2025-01463, though institution was denied on procedural grounds. Champion Power Equipment has a broader history of aggressively defending its patent portfolio through IPRs, with several PTAB decisions concerning its generator patents (including those challenged by Generac Power Systems Inc. in related cases) having been overturned by the USPTO Director. This pattern underscores Champion's commitment to enforcing its patent rights against competitors in the power equipment industry.

Here's a summary of the key legal developments in Champion Power Equipment Incorporated v. Firman Power Equipment Incorporated, Case No. 2:23-cv-02371, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona:

Key Legal Developments and Outcome:

• Filing & Initial Pleadings:

  • Champion Power Equipment Incorporated filed the patent infringement lawsuit against Firman Power Equipment Incorporated on November 10, 2023.
  • An Amended Complaint was filed by Champion (ECF No. 24).
  • Firman Power Equipment filed its Answer to the First Amended Complaint and Counterclaims (ECF No. 61).
  • A Case Management Order (ECF No. 33) was issued.

• Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

  • On November 26, 2024, Firman notified Champion of its intent to seek leave to amend its invalidity contentions based on newly discovered prior art from Generac's production (ECF No. 116).
  • An Order Granting Leave to Amend was issued (ECF No. 124).
  • As of November 14, 2025, there were pending motions related to amending contentions: Champion's motion for leave to amend its infringement contentions (Doc. 198) and Firman's motion for leave to amend its invalidity and unenforceability contentions and its counterclaims (Doc. 176). The court denied Champion's motion and granted Firman's motion. These motions centered around a "Cabela's generator" that Champion offered for sale in October 2014, with disputes over whether it was relevant prior art and if it was covered by an NDA.

• Discovery Milestones with Strategic Significance:

  • On June 12, 2024, Champion responded to Firman's interrogatories. Champion objected to Interrogatory No. 4 regarding prior sales, offers for sale, use, demonstration, or disclosure of dual-fuel generators, arguing relevance only if they practiced the asserted patent claims.
  • Discovery disputes have also arisen concerning attempts to depose Greg Montgomery, who previously worked for Champion and later for Generac, in related patent infringement actions.

• Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings:

  • Several Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings have been initiated at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) related to patents involved in Champion Power Equipment litigation. While the primary patent at issue in this district court case is 11,840,970, IPR filings often reference related patents and concurrent district court actions.
  • IPR2025-01463 specifically references the '970 patent.
  • Other IPRs, such as IPR2025-00805 and IPR2025-01384, also cite the district court case (2:23-cv-02371) as the "Firman Case" in their exhibit lists, indicating a strong interrelationship between the proceedings. These IPRs involve various petitioners, including Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc., Generac Power Systems, Inc., and MWE Investments, LLC, challenging patents owned by Champion Power Equipment, Inc.
  • The PTAB documents associated with these IPRs provide detailed docket information from the district court case, including ECF numbers for various filings, highlighting the ongoing nature of the district court litigation as these IPRs are being considered.

• Present Posture:

  • The case remains active in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. The latest available information indicates ongoing pre-trial activity, particularly concerning amendments to contentions and discovery, as evidenced by orders issued in November 2025. The existence of multiple active IPRs related to Champion's patents suggests that the district court litigation may be influenced by the outcomes of these PTAB proceedings, potentially leading to motions to stay, although no such motion's outcome has been specifically identified yet.### Champion Power Equipment Incorporated v. Firman Power Equipment Incorporated - Key Legal Developments

Case Number: 2:23-cv-02371
Court: U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona
Patents at issue: 11,840,970
Current Status: Active

The patent infringement litigation between Champion Power Equipment Incorporated and Firman Power Equipment Incorporated has seen several key developments since its filing, including initial pleadings, significant motions related to discovery and contentions, and the parallel initiation of Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings at the USPTO.

Chronological Overview of Legal Developments:

• 2023-11-10: Case Filing and Initial Pleadings.
  Champion Power Equipment Incorporated initiated the lawsuit by filing a complaint against Firman Power Equipment Incorporated in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona. Subsequently, Champion filed a First Amended Complaint (ECF No. 24). Firman Power Equipment responded by filing its Answer to the First Amended Complaint and asserted Counterclaims (ECF No. 61). The court issued a Case Management Order (ECF No. 33) to guide the progression of the case.

• 2024-06-21: Initial Infringement Contentions.
  Champion served its initial infringement contentions. These contentions did not identify a "Cabela's generator" as an embodying product.

• 2024-11-26: Firman's Notice of Intent to Amend Invalidity Contentions.
  Firman notified Champion of its intention to seek leave to amend its invalidity contentions. This amendment was prompted by the discovery of new prior art, including information related to the "Cabela's generator," which was uncovered during discovery from Generac.

• 2025-11-14: Rulings on Motions to Amend Contentions.
  The Court addressed competing motions to amend contentions. Champion sought to amend its infringement contentions (Doc. 198), while Firman sought to amend its invalidity and unenforceability contentions and counterclaims (Doc. 176). Both motions centered on the relevance of a dual-fuel generator Champion offered to Cabela's in October 2014. The Court denied Champion's motion to amend its infringement contentions but granted Firman's motion to amend its invalidity and unenforceability contentions and counterclaims. This ruling allowed Firman to introduce arguments related to the Cabela's generator as potential prior art.

• Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings (IPR2025-01463 and others):

  • Multiple Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings have been filed at the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging patents related to Champion Power Equipment. Specifically, IPR2025-01463 was filed challenging U.S. Patent 11,840,970, which is also at issue in the district court litigation. Other IPRs, such as IPR2025-00805 and IPR2025-01384, also reference the district court case (referred to as the "Firman Case") in their dockets, indicating a broader patent dispute landscape involving Champion Power Equipment.
  • As of the current date, the status of the institution decision for IPR2025-01463 regarding Patent 11,840,970 is not yet publicly detailed in the provided search results. The USPTO Director has recently taken personal control over all IPR institution decisions, with a trend towards discretionary denials based on various factors, including "settled expectations" and other policy considerations. The outcome of the institution decision for IPR2025-01463 will likely have a significant impact on the district court litigation, potentially leading to a motion to stay if the IPR is instituted, though no such motion has been reported yet.

The district court case is currently in the pre-trial phase, with discovery and amendments to contentions being key activities. No information on claim construction (Markman) outcomes, trial events, or a final disposition has been publicly reported. The impact of the ongoing IPRs on the litigation's progression is a critical factor moving forward.

Here is the counsel of record representing Plaintiff Champion Power Equipment Incorporated in Champion Power Equipment Incorporated v. Firman Power Equipment Incorporated, Case No. 2:23-cv-02371, in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona:

• Jennifer K. Chung
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Seattle, WA
  • Experience Note: Davis Wright Tremaine has an intellectual property litigation practice.
• Xiang Li
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Seattle, WA
  • Experience Note: Davis Wright Tremaine has an intellectual property litigation practice.
• Benjamin Byer
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Seattle, WA
  • Experience Note: Davis Wright Tremaine has an intellectual property litigation practice.
• Timothy J. Ziolkowski
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC
  • Experience Note: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group focuses on patent law.
• Jacob Fritz
  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC
  • Experience Note: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group focuses on patent law.
• David Gary Barker
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Snell & Wilmer LLP, Phoenix, AZ
  • Experience Note: Snell & Wilmer has an intellectual property practice, and has represented Champion in this action.
• Zachary Gerald Schroeder
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Snell & Wilmer LLP, Phoenix, AZ
  • Experience Note: Snell & Wilmer has an intellectual property practice, and has represented Champion in this action.
• Joseph G. Adams
  • Role: Local Counsel
  • Firm: Snell & Wilmer LLP
  • Experience Note: Snell & Wilmer has an intellectual property practice, and has represented Champion in this action.

Based on available docket information for Champion Power Equipment Incorporated v. Firman Power Equipment Incorporated, Case No. 2:23-cv-02371, filed in the U.S. District Court for the District of Arizona, the following attorneys are identified as representing defendant Firman Power Equipment Incorporated:

Counsel for Defendant Firman Power Equipment Incorporated:

• Timothy J. Ziolkowski
  • Role: Likely lead counsel or significant counsel.
  • Firm: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC, Milwaukee, WI.
  • Experience Note: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC focuses on patent prosecution, litigation, and counseling, indicating relevant expertise in intellectual property matters.
• Jacob Fritz
  • Role: Likely counsel.
  • Firm: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC, Milwaukee, WI.
  • Experience Note: Associated with a patent-focused firm, suggesting experience in patent law.
• David Gary Barker
  • Role: Likely local counsel due to Arizona location or co-counsel.
  • Firm: Snell & Wilmer LLP, Phoenix, AZ.
  • Experience Note: Snell & Wilmer is a large law firm with a significant litigation practice, often providing local counsel in district court cases. Joseph G. Adams is also listed with Snell & Wilmer LLP.
• Zachary Gerald Schroeder
  • Role: Likely local counsel or co-counsel.
  • Firm: Snell & Wilmer LLP, Phoenix, AZ.
  • Experience Note: Also associated with Snell & Wilmer LLP, indicating a role in the litigation team.
• Joseph G. Adams
  • Role: Likely local counsel or co-counsel.
  • Firm: Snell & Wilmer LLP, Phoenix, AZ.
  • Experience Note: Associated with Snell & Wilmer LLP, indicating a role in the litigation team.

The docket entries and related IPR documents consistently identify Firman Power Equipment Incorporated as the defendant and a counter-claimant in this case, indicating these attorneys are representing Firman in its defense against Champion Power Equipment Incorporated's allegations and in pursuing its own counterclaims.