Axcess Global Sciences v. Vita Pure Organics: Keto Supplement Patents Settled
Axcess Global Sciences, LLC asserted two patents covering BHB-based ketogenic supplement formulations against Randall McKim and Vita Pure Organics, targeting over 40 branded keto products. The Utah District Court case resolved via a confidential settlement and was dismissed with prejudice after 368 days, with each party bearing its own fees and costs.
BHB Keto Supplement Patent Dispute Ends in Confidential Settlement
On 29 December 2023, Axcess Global Sciences, LLC filed suit in the Utah District Court (Case 2:23-cv-00937) against individual defendant Randall McKim and his company Vita Pure Organics, asserting infringement of two U.S. patents — US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 — both directed to BHB-based ketogenic dietary supplement compositions. The complaint identified over 40 distinct keto supplement SKUs sold by the defendants, spanning well-known retail labels including Keto GT, One Shot Keto, Alpilean Keto, and Spark Keto, among others.
The parties reached a confidential settlement agreement, and on 30 December 2024 filed a joint stipulation of dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The case was dismissed with prejudice, meaning Axcess Global Sciences is barred from re-asserting the same claims against these specific defendants. Notably, the parties agreed that the Court would retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement, suggesting the deal contains ongoing obligations — potentially including licensing terms, royalty payments, or product restrictions — that may require judicial oversight.
At 368 days, the case ran longer than many pre-discovery settlements, suggesting substantive negotiations occurred before resolution. The absence of fee-shifting indicates neither party obtained a finding of exceptionality under 35 U.S.C. § 285, and no merits ruling was issued. The specific financial or licensing terms of the settlement remain confidential, leaving the broader implications for the BHB supplement market partially unclear from the public record alone.
Filing to Dismissed with Prejudice in 368 days
368 days — above the median for a settled district court patent case
Settled and dismissed with prejudice: what the resolution means for both parties
Rule 41 dismissal with prejudice following settlement
The parties invoked Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) — a joint stipulated dismissal — to close the case. A dismissal ‘with prejudice’ operates as a final adjudication on the merits for res judicata purposes, meaning Axcess Global Sciences cannot refile the same patent claims against McKim or Vita Pure Organics. The court’s retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement agreement is a standard mechanism where ongoing compliance obligations are embedded in the deal.
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) stipulated dismissalAxcess secures a binding resolution — terms confidential
Axcess Global Sciences obtains a legally enforceable settlement that closes the litigation risk of an adverse merits ruling. The with-prejudice dismissal suggests Axcess was satisfied with what it extracted from the defendants. Because the court retains jurisdiction to enforce the agreement, any breach by Vita Pure Organics or McKim can be adjudicated without re-filing — a meaningful enforcement lever for an IP licensor.
Settlement enforceable by courtVita Pure Organics avoids a merits ruling — at undisclosed cost
McKim and Vita Pure Organics avoided a judicial determination of infringement, which protects them from an adverse precedent. However, the with-prejudice dismissal and court-retained jurisdiction strongly suggest the defendants made binding commitments — potentially licensing fees, royalties, or product reformulation obligations. The absence of any public fee award indicates neither side moved for, or obtained, an exceptional case finding under 35 U.S.C. § 285.
No infringement finding on recordAxcess’s enforcement posture in the BHB supplement market remains intact
Because no claim construction or invalidity ruling was issued, US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 retain their full presumption of validity against the rest of the market. Other sellers of BHB-based keto supplements cannot rely on this case as precedent to design around or invalidate these patents. The breadth of products named in the complaint — 40+ SKUs across multiple brand lines — signals that Axcess may pursue a systematic licensing or enforcement programme across the keto supplement sector.
Patents remain fully enforceableFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Axcess Global Sciences, LLC | Company | Dietary supplement IP licensor — holder of US11020362B2 and US11241403B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Randall McKim | Individual | Keto supplement retailer offering 40+ BHB-based branded weight-loss productsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Vita Pure Organics | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Brian N. Platt | Attorney | Counsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Collin Hansen | Attorney | Counsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Workman Nydegger | Law Firm | Representing Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Elliot James Hales | Attorney | Counsel for Randall McKimSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Dorsey & Whitney, LLP | Law Firm | Representing Randall McKimSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Howard C. Nielson, Jr | Judge | Utah District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The stipulated dismissal language confirms a privately negotiated resolution rather than any judicial determination of patent validity or infringement. The phrase ‘with prejudice’ forecloses Axcess from re-litigating these specific claims against McKim and Vita Pure Organics, but creates no precedent on claim scope or validity. The court’s retained enforcement jurisdiction is the operative mechanism — it transforms the settlement agreement into a quasi-injunctive instrument enforceable without fresh proceedings, which is commercially significant for ongoing compliance monitoring.
US11020362B2 & US11241403B2 — BHB Ketogenic Supplement Formulations
US11020362B2 (application US16/720211) and US11241403B2 (application US17/198634) are assigned to Axcess Global Sciences and protect compositions and/or methods relating to beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) salt-based ketogenic dietary supplements. These patents sit within the rapidly commercialised exogenous ketone space, where BHB salts are marketed as weight-loss and metabolic-support supplements. The filing and grant timeline places them squarely within the peak commercial growth of the keto supplement category.
From a competitive standpoint, these patents represent a meaningful enforcement asset in a fragmented, high-volume supplement market. The breadth of products named across the complaint — spanning more than a dozen distinct brand names sold in multi-pack configurations — suggests the asserted claims are drafted broadly enough to capture common BHB formulation approaches rather than a single proprietary composition. For any company commercialising exogenous ketone or BHB-based dietary supplements in the U.S., these patents represent an active enforcement risk that has now been tested in federal litigation.
Should you run an FTO against US11020362B2 and US11241403B2?
Any company manufacturing, importing, or selling BHB-based ketogenic supplements in the U.S. — including private-label producers, white-label distributors, and branded supplement brands — should conduct a freedom-to-operate analysis against both patents before product launch or market expansion. The 40+ products named in this complaint indicate that Axcess interprets its claim scope broadly. The absence of any claim construction ruling means there is no public narrowing of those claims to rely on.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent allows IP and R&D teams to map their specific BHB formulation parameters against the full claim trees of both asserted patents, identify cited prior art that may support design-around strategies, and surface any continuation applications filed by Axcess Global Sciences that could extend coverage. Running an automated FTO now — before a demand letter arrives — is significantly less costly than responding to litigation.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11020362B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar BHB Supplement Patent Infringement Cases in U.S. District Courts
Cases involving BHB ketone and dietary supplement patent enforcement in U.S. district courts, including comparable Axcess Global Sciences actions and related keto IP disputes.
What this case signals for the BHB ketogenic supplement IP landscape
Axcess’s willingness to litigate 40+ product SKUs in a single action signals a systematic IP enforcement strategy across the keto supplement market.
Two asserted patents with no invalidity ruling — market-wide risk persists
US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 emerged from this case without any claim construction order or validity challenge on the record. Every competitor selling BHB-based keto supplement formulations in the U.S. market faces the same enforcement exposure that Vita Pure Organics faced. Companies relying on similar supplement compositions should treat these patents as fully live enforcement risks.
Court-retained jurisdiction signals ongoing licensing obligations
The stipulation expressly asks the court to retain jurisdiction to enforce the settlement — atypical for a clean walk-away. This structure consistently indicates the settlement embeds forward-looking obligations such as royalty payments, sales restrictions, or reformulation requirements. Competitors and investors in Vita Pure Organics should monitor product line changes as a proxy for settlement terms.
Axcess v Randall — key questions answered
Axcess Global Sciences asserted two patents: US11020362B2 (application US16/720211) and US11241403B2 (application US17/198634). Both patents relate to BHB-salt based ketogenic dietary supplement compositions. The case was filed in the Utah District Court on 29 December 2023.
The case was resolved via a confidential settlement agreement. The parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) on 30 December 2024, resulting in dismissal with prejudice. Each party agreed to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs, and the court retained jurisdiction to enforce the settlement terms.
A with-prejudice dismissal means Axcess Global Sciences is barred from re-filing the same patent infringement claims against Randall McKim and Vita Pure Organics. However, the patents themselves — US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 — remain valid and enforceable against third parties, as no invalidity ruling was issued.
The complaint named over 40 branded keto supplement SKUs, including Keto GT, One Shot Keto, Alpilean Keto, Spark Keto, Exipure Keto, Keto BHB, Keto Burn, Ultra Fast Keto Boost, and Optimal Max Keto, among others. Products were often listed in single, two-pack, three-pack, and five-pack configurations, suggesting enforcement across multiple retail bundle formats.
The parties expressly requested that the court retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. This is a standard procedural mechanism where the settlement embeds ongoing obligations — such as royalty payments, product restrictions, or licensing terms — requiring judicial enforcement if either party defaults, without the need to file a new lawsuit.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.