8082464 Canada Inc v Elko Wire Rope: Shovel Lifting Patent Case Transferred in 3 Days
Canadian IP holder 8082464 Canada Inc filed a patent infringement action against Elko Wire Rope and Mining Supply, Inc. over US11851309B2, covering a shovel lifting system and method used in mining operations in Carlin, Nevada. The case was transferred from the unofficial southern to northern division of the Nevada District Court in just 3 days under Local Rule LR IA 1-8(a).
A venue technicality, not a merits ruling: inside the 3-day transfer
On December 19, 2025, 8082464 Canada Inc filed a patent infringement complaint against Elko Wire Rope and Mining Supply, Inc. in the Nevada District Court, asserting US11851309B2 — a patent covering a shovel lifting system and method. The alleged acts of infringement occurred in Carlin, Nevada, a location within Elko County in the court’s unofficial northern division.
The case had previously been transferred to the District of Nevada from the District of Utah and was filed in the court’s unofficial southern division. The presiding judge, applying Local Rule LR IA 1-8(a), which requires civil actions to be filed in the division where the action allegedly arose, ordered the case transferred to the unofficial northern division. The original docket was closed without prejudice to the plaintiff regarding any federal limitation period and filing fee, with the matter to be reopened under a new docket number.
The three-day lifespan of this docket reflects a purely procedural outcome — no substantive analysis of the patent claims or the alleged infringement took place. The transfer preserves the plaintiff’s rights fully, suggesting the litigation over US11851309B2 is set to continue in the northern division. The absence of defendant counsel on record is consistent with the case’s brevity; no responsive pleading was filed before the transfer order issued.
Filing to Case Transferred in 3 days
Case resolved by internal transfer in 3 days — no merits ruling issued
Case transferred within Nevada District Court: what this means for both parties
What a within-district division transfer means
Under Nevada Local Rule LR IA 1-8(a), civil actions must be filed in the unofficial division where the action allegedly arose. Because the alleged infringement occurred in Carlin, Elko County — which falls in the northern division — the court ordered the case moved from the southern to the northern division. This is an administrative, not a merits-based, transfer: no finding was made on infringement, validity, or damages.
Procedural transfer, no merits rulingPlaintiff’s rights fully preserved after transfer
The transfer order expressly closes the southern-division docket without prejudice to the plaintiff regarding any federal limitation period and filing fee. This means 8082464 Canada Inc retains its full right to pursue the infringement claim under US11851309B2 in the northern division. The plaintiff’s litigation posture is unchanged; the transfer is neutral to its case on the merits.
Closed without prejudice — rights preservedElko Wire Rope now faces suit in the northern division
Elko Wire Rope and Mining Supply, Inc. will be served and required to respond in the newly opened northern-division docket. No responsive pleading was filed before the transfer order, so the defendant’s substantive defences — including any invalidity or non-infringement arguments against US11851309B2 — remain entirely untested. The transfer changes venue, not the scope or strength of the claims against the defendant.
Litigation continues under new docketMining equipment IP enforcement reaches Elko County operations
The case signals that holders of mining-equipment patents — particularly those covering hoisting and lifting systems — are actively monitoring operational use in Nevada’s mining districts. Companies supplying or operating shovel lifting equipment in Elko County should note that the northern division of the Nevada District Court will now be the relevant forum. The underlying patent, US11851309B2, remains in active enforcement; FTO analysis for shovel lifting technology is advisable.
Active enforcement — FTO review recommendedFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | 8082464 Canada Inc | Company | Canadian IP holding company — holder of US11851309B2 (shovel lifting system)Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Elko Wire Rope Inc | Company | Mining supply company based in Elko County, Nevada; alleged infringer of shovel lifting patentSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Charles J. Veverka | Attorney | Counsel for 8082464 Canada IncSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Jacob O. Israelsen | Attorney | Counsel for 8082464 Canada IncSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Paula D. Heyman | Attorney | Counsel for 8082464 Canada IncSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Vicki Zgodny | Attorney | Counsel for 8082464 Canada IncSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Clyde Snow & Sessions | Law Firm | Representing 8082464 Canada IncSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Maschoff Brennan Gilmore Israelsen & Mauriel LLP | Law Firm | Representing 8082464 Canada IncSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Nevada District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The transfer order makes no finding on the merits of the patent infringement claim. The court’s reasoning is confined to Local Rule LR IA 1-8(a): because the alleged infringing acts occurred in Carlin, Elko County, the action must be heard in the unofficial northern division. The closure is expressly without prejudice, meaning no statute of limitations is triggered and no estoppel arises. Both parties’ substantive positions regarding US11851309B2 remain entirely open for determination in the northern-division proceeding.
US11851309B2 — Shovel Lifting System and Method
US11851309B2 protects a shovel lifting system and method, a technology relevant to heavy mining operations involving the mechanical hoisting or positioning of industrial shovels and associated equipment. Filed under application number US16/606311, the patent was granted to 8082464 Canada Inc. The patent’s technical domain sits at the intersection of mining equipment engineering and mechanical handling systems, areas that underpin productivity and safety in open-pit and underground mining operations.
The active assertion of US11851309B2 against a Nevada mining supply company signals that the patent holder views its claims as broadly applicable to commercially deployed equipment in the field. For OEMs, distributors, and mining operators sourcing or deploying shovel lifting equipment — particularly in Nevada’s significant gold and copper mining districts — this patent represents a concrete infringement risk. The Utah-to-Nevada litigation trajectory suggests the patent holder is pursuing infringement wherever the technology is used, not limiting enforcement to a single jurisdiction.
Should you run an FTO analysis against US11851309B2?
Any company manufacturing, distributing, or operating shovel lifting systems or related hoisting equipment in North American mining operations should consider a freedom-to-operate review against US11851309B2. The patent is in active litigation, having been asserted in both Utah and Nevada courts. R&D teams developing mechanical lifting or positioning systems for mining shovels — including alternative designs — should map their technical approach against the granted claims before commercialisation.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim scope of US11851309B2 against your product specifications, flag design-around opportunities, and surface relevant prior art that could inform an invalidity analysis. For in-house IP teams supporting mining equipment product lines, Eureka can also monitor new filings by 8082464 Canada Inc to provide early warning of broader enforcement campaigns targeting shovel lifting technology.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11851309B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar mining equipment patent infringement cases in Nevada and Utah
Explore patent infringement actions involving mining equipment and mechanical lifting systems litigated in the Nevada and Utah District Courts.
What this case signals for the mining equipment IP landscape
A rapid procedural transfer keeps the shovel lifting patent dispute alive and resets the forum for what could become substantive enforcement in Nevada’s mining sector.
Local division rules can reset entire litigation timelines in days
This case closed in 3 days without any merits consideration solely because of a division-filing rule. IP litigants asserting patents tied to geographically specific operations — such as mine sites — must map alleged infringement locations to the correct court division before filing to avoid procedural delays and refiling costs.
US11851309B2 remains in active enforcement — no safe harbour yet
The transfer closes only this docket, not the underlying claim. The patent covering the shovel lifting system and method is being actively asserted, having already generated filings in Utah and now Nevada. Competitors and suppliers operating similar equipment in mining jurisdictions should treat this patent as a live enforcement risk.
8082464 v Elko — key questions answered
The Nevada District Court transferred the case from its unofficial southern division to the unofficial northern division after 3 days, applying Local Rule LR IA 1-8(a). The alleged infringement occurred in Carlin, Elko County, which falls in the northern division. No merits ruling was made. The case was closed without prejudice and reopened under a new docket number in the northern division.
The asserted patent is US11851309B2 (application number US16/606311), which covers a shovel lifting system and method. It is owned by 8082464 Canada Inc, a Canadian IP holding entity. The alleged infringing activities occurred in Carlin, Nevada, at operations associated with Elko Wire Rope and Mining Supply, Inc.
Under Nevada Local Rule LR IA 1-8(a), civil actions must be filed in the unofficial division of the court where the action allegedly arose. The alleged infringing acts occurred in Carlin, Nevada, located in Elko County, which falls within the court’s unofficial northern division. The case had been filed — following a prior transfer from Utah — in the southern division, prompting the judge to order the internal transfer.
No. The transfer order expressly closes the southern-division docket without prejudice to the plaintiff regarding any federal limitation period and filing fee. The underlying infringement claims under US11851309B2 are fully preserved and will be adjudicated in the newly opened northern-division case. No estoppel, waiver, or merits finding resulted from the transfer.
US11851309B2 is in active enforcement across multiple US jurisdictions. Mining equipment manufacturers, distributors, and operators deploying shovel lifting systems — particularly in Nevada and Utah — should conduct a freedom-to-operate analysis against this patent’s claims. The patent holder has demonstrated willingness to litigate, and the absence of a merits ruling means the claim scope has not yet been judicially narrowed.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.