Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. et al. v. Champion Power Equipment, Inc.

This Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceeding, IPR2025-00951, is part of a larger patent dispute in the power generation equipment industry. The petitioners, Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc., Generac Power Systems, Inc., and MWE Investments, LLC, are challenging the validity of claims in U.S. Patent No. 10,598,101, owned by Champion Power Equipment, Inc.. Harbor Freight Tools is a major American retailer of discount tools and equipment, including generators. Generac Power Systems is a prominent American manufacturer of backup power generation products for residential, commercial, and industrial markets. MWE Investments, LLC is identified as a manufacturer and licensor of the Westinghouse brand for outdoor power equipment, including generators. On the other side, Champion Power Equipment, Inc. is a leading manufacturer of portable generators, home standby generators, inverters, and other power generation equipment. The '101 patent generally covers generator control and combustion systems, specifically relating to methods for assembling an engine operable on both liquid and gaseous fuels for multi-fuel generators.

The IPR is currently pending before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), with Administrative Patent Judges Jon M. Jurgovan, Scott C. Moore, and Eric C. Jeschke presiding. This IPR is a defensive action in response to patent infringement lawsuits filed by Champion Power Equipment against the petitioners in various U.S. District Courts. Specifically, Champion has sued Harbor Freight Tools (originally in E.D. Wisconsin, but dismissed under the first-to-file rule in favor of a declaratory judgment action in C.D. California), Generac Power Systems (E.D. Wisconsin), and MWE Investments (via Westinghouse Electric Corp., in D. Nevada). The accused products in these underlying litigations are portable multi-fuel generators sold by Harbor Freight, Generac, and under the Westinghouse brand. The PTAB serves as an alternative venue for challenging patent validity, typically offering a faster and often less costly process, with a lower "preponderance of the evidence" standard for invalidity compared to the "clear and convincing evidence" standard required in district courts.

This case is notable as it exemplifies a multi-front patent dispute within the competitive power generation equipment market. The petitioners' collective challenge at the PTAB highlights the strategic interplay between district court litigation and IPR proceedings, where defendants frequently leverage IPRs to challenge asserted patents. The multiple district court cases and associated IPRs suggest an aggressive enforcement and defense strategy by the respective parties over key generator technologies, particularly those involving multi-fuel capabilities. The procedural posture also brings into play the PTAB's discretionary denial framework (often referred to as "Fintiv"), which considers factors like parallel district court proceedings, though the specific institution decision for this IPR is pending.

Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. et al. v. Champion Power Equipment, Inc. - Litigation Summary

This report details the key legal developments and outcomes of the patent infringement litigation and related inter partes review (IPR) proceedings involving Champion Power Equipment, Inc. and its competitors, primarily Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. and Generac Power Systems, Inc., concerning U.S. Patent No. 10,598,101 (the '101 patent) and other related patents.

District Court Litigation

The dispute unfolded across multiple district court cases, ultimately consolidating around a first-filed declaratory judgment action.

1. Central District of California (C.D. Cal. Case No. 2:24-cv-08722)

• Filing & Initial Pleadings (2024-10-09): Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. initiated a declaratory judgment action against Champion Power Equipment, Inc. on October 9, 2024. This action preempted Champion's later-filed infringement suit. Champion subsequently filed an answer and counterclaims in this case.
• Case Assigned: The case was assigned to Judge Stephen V. Wilson and referred to Judge Alka Sagar.
• Discovery Milestones: As of an unspecified date prior to September 2025, discovery was ongoing, and the parties were conferring regarding proposed claim constructions. The court had not yet issued a Markman order.
• Final Disposition (2025-12-30): The Central District of California case (2:24-cv-08722) was closed on December 30, 2025. The specific nature of the closure (e.g., settlement, voluntary dismissal, or judgment) is not detailed in the available public records.

2. Eastern District of Wisconsin (E.D. Wis. Case No. 2:24-cv-01302)

• Filing (2024-10-14): Champion Power Equipment Inc. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. on October 14, 2024, asserting infringement of thirteen utility patents, including the '101 patent.
• Service of Process (2024-10-18): Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. was served on October 18, 2024.
• Motion to Dismiss/Transfer (2024-11-05): Harbor Freight filed a Motion to Dismiss or, in the Alternative, to Transfer the case.
• Dismissal (2025-04-28): The Eastern District of Wisconsin dismissed Champion's infringement lawsuit in its entirety on April 28, 2025. The court applied the "first-to-file" rule, determining that the declaratory judgment action filed by Harbor Freight in the Central District of California on October 9, 2024, controlled jurisdiction.

3. Related Litigation: Champion Power Equipment Inc. v. Generac Power Systems Inc. (E.D. Wis. Case No. 24-cv-1281)

• Filing (2024-10-09): Champion Power Equipment, Inc. filed suit against Generac Power Systems, Inc., alleging infringement on eleven patents related to multi-fuel generators, including the '101 patent.
• Answer & Counterclaims (2025-02-02): Generac filed its initial answer, asserting counterclaims of non-infringement and invalidity.
• Amended Answer (2025-05-15): Generac filed an amended answer to add two counterclaims of infringement by Champion of Generac's own carbon monoxide detection patents.
• Omnibus Order (2025-09-17): An omnibus decision and order was issued, addressing various motions, including protective orders and Champion's motion to sever counterclaims.

Parallel PTAB IPR Proceedings on the Asserted Patents

Multiple IPRs were filed against Champion Power Equipment's patents, including the '101 patent, by petitioners including Harbor Freight and Generac.

1. IPR2025-00951 (Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc. et al. v. Champion Power Equipment, Inc. concerning U.S. Patent 10,598,101 B2)

• Filing (2025-01-01): The IPR challenging the '101 patent was filed by Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc., Generac Power Systems, Inc., and MWE Investments, LLC.
• Conditional Order on Counsel (2025-09-18): The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued an order conditionally granting Champion Power Equipment, Inc.'s motion for withdrawal and substitution of counsel. This order was common to both IPR2025-00951 and IPR2025-00805.
• Institution Decision Status: The institution decision or final disposition for IPR2025-00951 is not detailed in the available public records as of the current date.

2. IPR2025-00805 (Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al. v. Champion Power Equipment, Inc. concerning U.S. Patent 10,393,034)

• Filing (2025-04-28): This IPR was filed by Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. et al.
• Institution Denied (2026-02-02): Institution of this IPR was denied by the PTAB on February 2, 2026.

3. IPR2025-01121 (Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc. v. Champion Power Equipment, Inc. concerning U.S. Patent 11,143,120)

• Filing (2025-06-23): This IPR was filed by Harbor Freight Tools USA, Inc.
• Institution Denied (2025-12-01): Institution was denied on December 1, 2025, in view of the Revvo Technologies, Inc. v. Cerebrum Sensor Technologies, Inc. decision.

In summary, the district court patent infringement litigation between Harbor Freight and Champion, which involved the '101 patent, ultimately proceeded in the Central District of California after the Wisconsin case was dismissed under the first-to-file rule. The C.D. Cal. case itself was closed in December 2025, although the specific terms of its resolution are not publicly detailed. Concurrently, Harbor Freight and its co-petitioners challenged the '101 patent (and others) at the PTAB, with at least two related IPRs resulting in denied institution, while the institution outcome for IPR2025-00951, specifically for the '101 patent, remains pending or not publicly disclosed in the available information.

Based on available information for IPR2025-00951 and related proceedings, the counsel of record for the plaintiff-petitioners include attorneys from Foley & Lardner LLP and previously from Ice Miller LLP for MWE Investments, LLC.

Here is a breakdown of the identified counsel:

Representing Generac Power Systems, Inc. (and likely Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc.):

• Michael R. Houston (Lead Counsel)
  • Firm: Foley & Lardner LLP
  • Office Location: Chicago, IL (based on general firm information and his profile, specific office for this case is not explicitly stated in snippets but Chicago is a primary Foley IP office).
  • Relevant Experience: Michael R. Houston is a partner and intellectual property attorney who leads Foley & Lardner's Patent Office Trials Practice. His practice focuses on patent challenges before the USPTO, including inter partes review (IPR) proceedings, and patent litigation at trial and appeal levels across various technology areas such as pharmaceuticals, medical devices, electronics, and chemical processing. He has been recognized for his exceptional success rate in IPRs.

Previously Representing MWE Investments, LLC (MWE has since withdrawn its counsel due to settlement):

• Thomas A. Walsh (Counsel)
  • Firm: Ice Miller LLP
  • Office Location: Indianapolis, IN (based on firm profile).
  • Relevant Experience: Thomas A. Walsh is a member of Ice Miller's Intellectual Property Group, with experience in patent prosecution, licensing, intellectual property strategies, and technology transactions across various technology areas. Prior to his legal career, he spent over 11 years in military electronics.
• Thomas A. Rammer (Of Counsel)
  • Firm: Ice Miller LLP
  • Office Location: Chicago, IL (based on firm profile).
  • Relevant Experience: Thomas A. Rammer is Of Counsel in Ice Miller's Intellectual Property Group, with broad federal trial experience in pharmaceutical, semiconductor, and software matters. He is experienced in all aspects of the litigation process, including patent claim construction, summary judgment motions, and Federal Circuit appeals. He also advises on litigation alternatives such as licensing and post-grant patent procedures.
• Alexas D. Siliunas (Associate Attorney)
  • Firm: Ice Miller LLP (as of October 2023)
  • Office Location: (Likely Chicago, IL or Indianapolis, IN, given firm and other counsel, but not specified in results).
  • Relevant Experience: Alek Siliunas is an associate patent attorney with experience in patent prosecution, IP strategy, licensing, technology transactions, trademarks, and trade secrets, particularly in semiconductor and microchip technology, wearable devices, and data storage.

It's important to note that MWE Investments, LLC has requested the withdrawal of its counsel (Walsh, Rammer, and Siliunas) from IPR2025-00805 and other related IPRs, including IPR2025-00951, following a settlement with Champion Power Equipment, Inc. Generac Power Systems, Inc. intends to remain as a petitioner in IPR2025-00951. Therefore, while Walsh, Rammer, and Siliunas were counsel for one of the original petitioners, they are no longer representing a party in this specific IPR. The primary remaining petitioner counsel for Generac (and by association, likely Harbor Freight Tools USA Inc.) is Michael R. Houston.

Champion Power Equipment, Inc. is represented by attorneys from Perilla Knox & Hildebrandt LLP and Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC in IPR2025-00951.

The counsel of record for Champion Power Equipment, Inc. are:

Perilla Knox & Hildebrandt LLP (PKH)

• Joseph W. Staley
  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm and Office Location: Perilla Knox & Hildebrandt LLP, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Relevant Experience: Recognized for strategic advocacy in IPR proceedings, including cases where PTAB institution decisions were overturned on Director Review.
• Scott P. Amy
  • Role: Backup Counsel (pro hac vice forthcoming as of September 2025).
  • Firm and Office Location: Perilla Knox & Hildebrandt LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: Part of the PKH team representing Champion in IPR challenges.
• Thomas F. Finch
  • Role: Backup Counsel.
  • Firm and Office Location: Perilla Knox & Hildebrandt LLP.
  • Relevant Experience: Involved in IPR litigations for Champion.

Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC

• Timothy J. Ziolkowski
  • Role: Backup Counsel.
  • Firm and Office Location: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC, Port Washington, WI.
  • Relevant Experience: Has a longstanding role as Champion's patent attorney, involved in patent prosecution and litigation matters for Champion.
• Jacob M. Fritz
  • Role: Backup Counsel.
  • Firm and Office Location: Ziolkowski Patent Solutions Group SC, Port Washington, WI.
  • Relevant Experience: Involved in drafting patent applications and litigation matters for Champion.

Previous counsel, Daisy Manning and Jennifer E. Hoekel, have withdrawn from representing Champion Power Equipment in this and related IPRs. While Husch Blackwell LLP also represents Champion in related district court litigation, their role is not for patent prosecution, which is the primary focus for IPR counsel.