FSU Research Foundation vs. SentiMetal Journey: Linear Motor Patent Case Ends in Dismissal
Was möchten Sie als Nächstes tun?
Wählen Sie Ihren Weg entsprechend Ihren aktuellen Bedürfnissen:
📋 Fallzusammenfassung
| Fallbezeichnung | FSU Research Foundation Inc. v. SentiMetal Journey LLC |
| Fallnummer | 4:22-cv-00430 (N.D. Fla.) |
| Gericht | U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida |
| Dauer | Dec 2022 – Apr 2024 486 days |
| Ergebnis | Mit Vorurteil abgewiesen |
| Streitige Patente | |
| Beschuldigte Produkte | SentiMetal Journey’s Highly Efficient Linear Motor Products |
Fallübersicht
Die Parteien
⚖️ Kläger
The technology commercialization arm of Florida State University, managing the university’s intellectual property portfolio and licensing agreements.
🛡️ Beklagter
A Florida-based commercial entity involved in highly efficient linear motor products, placing it within FSURF’s enforcement scope.
Streitige Patente
This case centered on two granted U.S. patents covering highly efficient linear motor technology, a field drawing increasing commercial and defense-sector attention. Linear motors convert electrical energy directly into linear mechanical motion, deployed in applications including transportation systems, manufacturing automation, and aerospace actuators.
- • U.S. Patent No. 10,601,293 B2 — covering innovations in highly efficient linear motor design and architecture
- • U.S. Patent No. 10,774,696 B2 — covering related linear motor technology, likely addressing complementary system components or operational methods
Developing a Linear Motor Product?
Check if your technology might infringe these or related patents before launch.
Das Urteil und die rechtliche Analyse
Ergebnis
The case terminated via stipulated dismissal with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), effective without court order upon filing. This procedural designation means FSURF cannot re-file the same claims against SentiMetal Journey for the same conduct. No damages award, royalty determination, or injunctive relief was publicly entered, suggesting a private resolution such as a licensing agreement or design-around was reached.
Rechtliche Bedeutung
For linear motor patent infringement litigation, this case reinforces a consistent pattern: university research foundation patent assertions frequently resolve through private agreement before trial. The two patents involved represent substantive R&D investment by FSU researchers, and their survival through litigation without invalidity findings preserves their future licensing utility. The case also affirms that Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) stipulated dismissals under *Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC*, 677 F.3d 1272, 1278 (11th Cir. 2012) remain the preferred resolution vehicle in the Eleventh Circuit when both parties seek a clean exit without judicial merits determination.
Freedom-to-Operate-Analyse (FTO)
This case highlights critical IP risks in linear motor technology development. Choose your next step:
📋 Die Auswirkungen dieses Falls verstehen
Informieren Sie sich über die spezifischen Risiken und Auswirkungen dieses Rechtsstreits.
- View all related patents in the linear motor technology space
- See which companies are most active in linear motor patents
- Understand claim construction patterns relevant to these patents
🔍 Das Risiko meines Produkts überprüfen
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own linear motor technology or product.
- Geben Sie Ihre Produktbeschreibung oder technischen Merkmale ein.
- KI identifiziert potenziell blockierende Patente
- Erhalten Sie einen umsetzbaren Risikobewertungsbericht
Hochrisikogebiet
Highly efficient linear motor designs
2 Active Patents
Key patents involved in this case
Design-Around-Optionen
Bei sorgfältiger Prüfung der Ansprüche möglich
✅ Wichtigste Erkenntnisse
Stipulated dismissals under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) self-execute in the Eleventh Circuit per *Anago* — no court order required.
Verwandte Rechtsprechung suchen →University patent assertions in technical fields increasingly mirror commercial NPE litigation in sophistication and counsel quality.
Präzedenzfälle erkunden →Both patents (US10601293B2; US10774696B2) survive without invalidity cloud — FSURF retains full enforcement options against other parties.
View patent legal status →Häufig gestellte Fragen
The case involved U.S. Patent No. 10,601,293 B2 (Application No. 16/370,576) and U.S. Patent No. 10,774,696 B2 (Application No. 15/947,131), both covering highly efficient linear motor technology.
The parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). No court order was required. Specific settlement terms were not publicly disclosed, but such dismissals often reflect private licensing agreements or product design-arounds.
The patents remain valid and enforceable. Companies in the linear motor space should treat both patents (US10601293B2 and US10774696B2) as active licensing and enforcement risks and conduct freedom-to-operate analysis accordingly. This also underscores that university technology transfer offices are active in monetizing their IP.
Sind Sie bereit, Ihre Patentstrategie zu stärken?
Schließen Sie sich den über 18.000 Fachleuten aus dem Bereich des geistigen Eigentums an, die PatSnap Eureka nutzen, um mit KI-gestützter Präzision Recherchen zum Stand der Technik durchzuführen, Patentanmeldungen zu erstellen und Wettbewerbslandschaften zu analysieren.
Referenzen
- U.S. Patent No. 10,601,293 B2 – Google Patents
- U.S. Patent No. 10,774,696 B2 – Google Patents
- PACER Case Lookup for 4:22-cv-00430
- Eleventh Circuit Anago Franchising, Inc. v. Shaz, LLC Decision
- PatSnap – Lösungen für den Umgang mit geistigem Eigentum für Anwaltskanzleien
Dieser Artikel dient ausschließlich zu Informationszwecken und stellt keine Rechtsberatung dar. Alle Angaben zu den Fällen stammen aus öffentlich zugänglichen Gerichtsakten. Informationen zu den Funktionen der Plattform finden Sie auf PatSnap.