Chinese Seller Files Bilateral Class Action to Void Thousands of Schedule A Default Judgments

What happened

On September 3, 2026, Chinese seller Ningbo Jiaruisi E-Commerce Co., Ltd. (formerly operating on Amazon as GENISBULB) sued FRISBEE trademark owner Wham-O and its affiliate Intersport Corp in the Northern District of Illinois. The case is No. 1:26-cv-10701, before Judge John Robert Blakey.

This is not an ordinary lawsuit. The complaint proposes an unusual “bilateral class action”:

• Plaintiff class: mainland-China sellers who suffered default judgments in Schedule A cases
• Defendant class: represented by Wham-O, covering Schedule A plaintiffs who obtained default judgments without Hague Convention service

According to plaintiff’s counsel’s press release, Wham-O has filed at least 116 Schedule A cases, and Jiaruisi was defendant No. 44 in one of them (1:22-cv-06802).

The legal basis

The suit rests on the Seventh Circuit’s May 2026 Kangol decision: where the Hague Service Convention applies, email service on defendants in China is not permitted (see our earlier coverage).

The plaintiff argues that many Schedule A default judgments rest on email service, so the court lacked personal jurisdiction and those judgments are void. It asks the court to:

• Declare the default judgments void
• Stop further enforcement
• Return funds taken from seller accounts, with an accounting

Notably, counsel in this case, Wesley E. Johnson, also represented the seller side in Kangol.

Where it stands

• On September 15, counsel appeared for the Wham-O defendants, who waived formal service; their answer is due December 14, 2026
• The court ordered a status report by December 21, 2026
• No class has been certified, and the court has not ruled on any allegations.

The case has drawn attention in the U.S. IP bar. Mayer Brown’s October 15 podcast on recent Schedule A developments discussed this “unprecedented bilateral class action.”

What this means for cross-border sellers

• If you suffered a Schedule A default judgment and had funds taken, this case may eventually concern you. Even if no class is certified, Kangol itself supports individual motions to vacate.
• Start gathering records now: platform notices, plaintiff emails, case numbers, records of amounts taken, and your store’s registered address information. These determine whether you can argue improper service.
• Don’t overestimate the outcome. Class actions are slow and uncertain, and even if a judgment is vacated, a plaintiff may re-serve properly and continue.

Our suggestion

Sellers with past default judgments should have counsel assess two things: whether service in their case was defective, and whether to move to vacate individually, wait on the class action, or both.

Sources

• CourtListener docket: Ningbo Jiaruisi E-Commerce Co. v. Intersport Corp, 1:26-cv-10701 (N.D. Ill.)
• Plaintiff's counsel press release (PR Newswire, Sept. 10, 2026; attorney advertising)
• Mayer Brown podcast: Schedule A Litigation: The Courts Strike Back (Oct. 15, 2026)