Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Axcess Global Sciences v. Vitalux & VitalityGlow: Default Judgment | PatSnap
Explore in Eureka
Case ID2:24-cv-00082
FiledApr 2024
ClosedMay 2025
Patent Litigation

Axcess Global Sciences v. Vitalux & VitalityGlow: Default Judgment in ACV Gummy Patent Dispute

Axcess Global Sciences, LLC secured a default judgment against Vitalux Inc and VitalityGlow Inc in the Wyoming District Court, alleging infringement of two dietary supplement patents covering ACV and keto gummy formulations. The court awarded $620,310 in enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, plus a permanent injunction and asset freeze extending to Amazon and third-party financial institutions.

Resolution time
405days
405 days from filing to default judgment — faster than median patent case disposition in U.S. district courts
Patents asserted
2
US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 — ACV and keto dietary supplement gummy formulations
Outcome
Default Judgment
Judgment entered against defendants for failure to appear; plaintiff prevails on all patent and false advertising counts
Cost ruling
Fees Awarded
$29,742.28 in attorneys’ fees and costs awarded to plaintiff in addition to $620,310 enhanced damages
Published by PatSnap Insights Team · Verified by PatSnap Eureka Data
Case overview

Default judgment, asset freeze, and permanent injunction in ACV supplement patent dispute

Axcess Global Sciences, LLC filed suit on April 19, 2024 in the U.S. District Court for Wyoming against Vitalux Inc and VitalityGlow Inc, asserting infringement of two U.S. patents — US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 — covering dietary supplement formulations sold as ACV gummies and extra-strength keto gummies. The accused products, including Maxibears ACV Gummies, Vitalena ACV Gummies, and Vitalena Nature Extra Strength Keto Gummies (identified by Amazon ASINs B0B34M4NHC and B0BRY18HDZ), were sold through online marketplaces including Amazon.

The case closed on May 29, 2025, through default judgment — meaning the defendants failed to respond or appear, and the court entered judgment entirely in the plaintiff’s favor. The court found infringement on Counts I–II and false advertising on Counts III–V, awarding $620,310 in enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284, which permits up to treble damages for willful infringement, plus $29,742.28 in attorneys’ fees. Defendants and their affiliates were permanently enjoined from making, selling, or importing the accused products, and third-party providers including Amazon were ordered to freeze and release defendants’ funds.

The 405-day resolution is consistent with the expedited timelines that default proceedings typically produce, as no contested litigation phases — claim construction, discovery, or trial — were required. The scale of the enhanced damages award suggests the court found the infringement sufficiently egregious to warrant multiplication of the base damages figure, though the precise base calculation is not disclosed in the public record. The defendants’ complete non-participation leaves unanswered questions about whether the accused products remain available through other channels or under different ASINs.

Case at a glance
Case no.2:24-cv-00082
DefendantVitalux Inc
CourtWyoming
JudgeN/A
FiledApril 19, 2024
ClosedMay 29, 2025
Duration405 days
OutcomeDefault Judgment
Verdict causeInfringement Action
BasisDefault Judgment
Prior Art Intelligence
See what prior art exists on this patent.
Eureka scans millions of patents and papers to surface prior art that may have invalidated these claims before costly litigation begins.
Check Prior Art
Case data sourced from PACER / Wyoming District Court via PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore similar cases ↗
Case timeline

Filing to Default Judgment in 405 days

405 days from filing to default judgment — faster than median patent case disposition in U.S. district courts

Case timeline: Complaint filed APR 19 2024, NOV–DEC — 405 days total Horizontal timeline showing the three key events in Axcess Global Sciences, LLC v Vitalux Inc from filing to resolution. Source: PACER, Wyoming District Court. APR 19 2024 Complaint filed Pre-trial proceedings MAY 29 2025 Default Judgment 405 DAYS TOTAL
Default judgment

Default judgment entered: what the order means for both parties

Legal mechanism

Default judgment: plaintiff wins without merits contest

A default judgment is entered when a defendant fails to appear or respond to a complaint. The court does not adjudicate the merits; instead, it accepts the plaintiff’s well-pleaded allegations as true and fashions appropriate relief. Here, the Wyoming District Court entered judgment on all seven counts — two patent infringement counts and five false advertising counts — solely on the basis of defendants’ non-participation. Enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 were also awarded, consistent with a finding of willfulness.

Default — no merits adjudication
Plaintiff outcome

Axcess Global Sciences obtains maximum relief package

Axcess Global Sciences secured $620,310 in enhanced damages, $29,742.28 in attorneys’ fees, a permanent injunction barring further infringement and false advertising, and a third-party asset freeze reaching Amazon and financial institutions. The injunction extends to affiliates, agents, and confederates — providing Axcess broad enforcement reach. Ongoing authority to serve the order on new third-party providers strengthens long-term enforceability, though actual collection depends on defendants’ recoverable assets.

Enhanced damages + permanent injunction
Defendant outcome

Vitalux and VitalityGlow face asset freeze and contempt risk

By failing to respond, Vitalux Inc and VitalityGlow Inc forfeited any opportunity to contest infringement, challenge patent validity, or dispute the damages calculation. Their Amazon accounts and financial institution balances are subject to immediate freeze and transfer to plaintiff. Any future non-compliance is deemed contempt, exposing defendants to additional fines and property seizure. The default posture makes post-judgment challenge procedurally difficult, requiring a showing of excusable neglect or a meritorious defense.

Asset freeze — contempt exposure
Commercial implications

Online supplement sellers face escalating IP enforcement risk

This case is consistent with a broader enforcement pattern targeting Amazon marketplace sellers of dietary supplements with functionally overlapping formulations. The court’s willingness to extend the injunction and asset freeze to Amazon and unnamed financial institutions signals that U.S. district courts will exercise broad equitable powers in default supplement IP cases. Sellers operating under multiple brand identities or ASINs with similar formulations to patented ACV or keto gummy products should treat this order as a material FTO risk signal.

Amazon IP enforcement — dietary supplements
Legal analysis based on PACER docket records for case 2:24-cv-00082 and PatSnap Eureka litigation intelligence Search PatSnap Eureka ↗
Parties and representation

Full party and counsel information

RoleNameTypeDetail
PlaintiffAxcess Global Sciences, LLCCompanyDietary supplement IP licensor — holder of US11020362B2 and US11241403B2Search in Eureka ↗
DefendantVitalux IncCompanyOnline supplement sellers operating Vitalux and VitalityGlow branded ACV and keto gummy products on AmazonSearch in Eureka ↗
Co-DefendantVitalityGlow IncCompanySearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselAlaina Marie StedillieAttorneyCounsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselBrian Nelson PlattAttorneyCounsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselCollin HansenAttorneyCounsel for Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff law firmCrowley Fleck PLLPPLaw FirmRepresenting Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff law firmWorkman NydeggerLaw FirmRepresenting Axcess Global Sciences, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Presiding judgeJudge N/AJudgeWyoming District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗
Official verdict

Official order — verbatim text

“IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants are deemed in default and that default judgment is entered against Defendants as outlined in this Order. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that: 1. Judgment is granted in favor of Plaintiff on the claims of patent infringement asserted against Defendants set forth in Counts I–II of the Complaint. 2. Judgment is granted in favor of Plaintiff on the claims of false advertising asserted against Defendants set forth in Counts III–V of the Complaint. 3. Defendants, their affiliates, officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys, confederates, and all persons acting for, with, by, through, under, or in active concert or participation with them be permanently enjoined and restrained from: (a) Further infringing the Asserted Patents, including by making, using, importing, offering for sale, or selling the Accused Products or any other products that infringe upon Plaintiff’s Asserted Patents; (b) manufacturing, shipping, delivering, holding for sale, transferring or otherwise moving, storing, distributing, returning, or otherwise disposing of, in any manner, the Accused Products; (c) falsely advertising any products sold in the future, including, but not limited to: (i) misidentifying the ingredients found in any product; (ii) claiming, in form and/or substance, directly or indirectly, that any product containing raspberry ketones has an effect on weight loss; and (iii) offering monetary or other benefit to a consumer that purchases any future product in exchange for a positive review of the product. (d) aiding, abetting, contributing to, or otherwise assisting anyone in performing any of the acts enjoined in parts (a)–(c) above. Pursuant to 35 U.S.C. § 284, Plaintiff is awarded enhanced damages in the amount of $620,310. 5. Plaintiff is awarded attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $29,742.28. 6. Any third party with actual notice of this Order who is providing services for any of the Defendants, or in connection with any of the Defaulting Defendants’ online marketplaces, including, without limitation, any online marketplace platforms such as Amazon.com, Inc. (“Amazon”) and any financial institutions holding assets of Defendants (“Third-Party Provider”) shall, within seven (7) calendar days of receipt of this Order: (a) locate all accounts and funds connected to Defendants; and (b) permanently restrain and enjoin any such accounts or funds from transferring or disposing of any funds (up to the total damages and fees awarded in Paragraphs 4 and 5 above); and (c) upon request, serve upon counsel for Plaintiff the account numbers, institutions, balances, transaction history, and history of transfers to and/or from any account in which any of the Defendants holds a legal or equitable interest, which information will be treated by counsel for Plaintiff as outside Attorneys’ Eyes Only and not disclosed to Plaintiff or to anyone other than the Court. 7. All monies (up to the total damages and fees awarded in Paragraphs 4 and 5 above) currently restrained in Defendants’ financial accounts, including monies held by ThirdParty Providers, are hereby released to Plaintiff as partial payment of the above-identified damages, and Third-Party Providers, are ordered to release to Plaintiff the amounts from Defendants’ financial accounts within ten (10) business days of receipt of this Order. 8. Until Plaintiff has recovered full payment of monies owed to it by any Defaulting Defendant, Plaintiff shall have the ongoing authority to serve this Order on Third Party Providers associated with any Defendant, and any such Third-Party Provider so served shall comply with the requirements of paragraphs 6 and 7 above. 9. Any failure by a Defendant to comply with the terms of this Default Judgment Order shall be deemed contempt of Court, subjecting the Defendant to contempt remedies to be determined by the Court, including fines and seizure of property. 10. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over this matter and the parties in order to construe and enforce this Judgment and permanent injunction.”
Source: PACER Docket, Case 2:24-cv-00082, Wyoming District Court

The default judgment order covers all seven counts in the complaint — patent infringement (Counts I–II) and false advertising (Counts III–V) — with the court accepting the plaintiff’s allegations as true given defendants’ failure to appear. The award of enhanced damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 is notable: such enhancement typically requires a finding of willfulness, which the court appears to have inferred from the totality of defendants’ conduct, including alleged false advertising and failure to engage in proceedings. The permanent injunction’s extension to unnamed affiliates and third-party platforms reflects the court’s exercise of broad equitable jurisdiction, and the ongoing authority to serve the order on future third-party providers makes this a living enforcement instrument rather than a one-time award.

PACER case 2:24-cv-00082 · Public docket record Explore in Eureka ↗
Patent at issue

US11020362B2 & US11241403B2 — ACV and keto dietary supplement gummy formulations

Publication No.US11020362B2
Application No.US16/720211
Patent details
ProductACV dietary supplement gummy formulations and compositions
Cited in actionApril 19, 2024

Publication No.US11241403B2
Application No.US17/198634
Patent details
Productketo dietary supplement gummy formulations and methods of use
Cited in actionApril 19, 2024

US11020362B2 (Application No. US16/720211) and US11241403B2 (Application No. US17/198634) are U.S. utility patents held by Axcess Global Sciences, LLC covering dietary supplement formulations in gummy delivery form — specifically apple cider vinegar (ACV) and extra-strength ketogenic supplement compositions. The patents sit within the functional food and nutraceutical IP space, where formulation-level claims can cover specific ingredient combinations, dosage forms, and bioavailability characteristics that differentiate branded supplement products from generic equivalents.

For competitors and private-label supplement manufacturers active on Amazon and other e-commerce platforms, these patents represent a credible enforcement risk in the high-growth ACV and keto gummy segment. Axcess Global Sciences has demonstrated willingness to litigate in Wyoming federal court and obtain default judgments with enhanced damages and platform-level injunctions. Any brand selling ACV gummies, keto gummies, or closely adjacent formulations — particularly those marketed with weight-loss claims — should conduct a formal FTO analysis against both patents before scaling online distribution.

Patent data sourced from USPTO via PatSnap Eureka patent database Search patent records in Eureka ↗
Freedom to operate

Should you run an FTO against US11020362B2 and US11241403B2?

Any company manufacturing, importing, or selling ACV gummy supplements, keto gummy formulations, or functionally similar dietary supplement gummy products through U.S. e-commerce channels — including Amazon third-party sellers, DTC brands, and white-label suppliers — should evaluate their exposure to US11020362B2 and US11241403B2. This case confirms that Axcess Global Sciences actively monitors and enforces these patents, and that Wyoming federal courts will grant broad injunctive and monetary relief, including account freezes, against non-responsive defendants.

PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent allows R&D and legal teams to map product formulations against the claim scope of both asserted patents, identify design-around opportunities, and surface prior art that may support an IPR petition or invalidity argument. Eureka can also alert you to new filings by Axcess Global Sciences, track related litigation patterns, and benchmark your formulation against the full landscape of ACV and keto supplement IP — giving you the intelligence to make defensible product launch decisions.

PatSnap Eureka FTO Search

Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11020362B2 to assess your product’s exposure

Run FTO in Eureka →
Related litigation

Similar dietary supplement patent enforcement cases in U.S. district courts

Cases involving ACV and keto supplement patent enforcement on Amazon, filed in Wyoming and comparable U.S. district courts, with default judgment or injunction outcomes.

🔍
Access 40+ similar cases in PatSnap Eureka
Axcess Global Sciences, LLC patent enforcement history, Wyoming case history, Axcess Global Sciences, LLC’s full IP portfolio, and comparable case analysis
ACV gummy patent casesKeto supplement IP disputesAmazon marketplace injunctionsD. Wyoming default judgments
Unlock similar cases in Eureka →
Strategic implications

What this case signals for the dietary supplement IP landscape

Default judgments with asset freezes are reshaping how supplement patent holders enforce rights against online-first sellers.

Enhanced damages signal willfulness findings even in default proceedings

The court awarded $620,310 under 35 U.S.C. § 284, which permits enhanced damages only where infringement is deemed willful or egregious. Even in the absence of a contested merits hearing, courts in the D. Wyoming are willing to apply enhanced damages multipliers, raising the litigation cost stakes for supplement sellers who ignore complaints.

Third-party provider injunctions extend enforcement reach to Amazon

The order’s explicit reach to Amazon and financial institutions holding defendant assets represents a powerful enforcement lever for patent holders in the supplement space. IP teams monitoring ACV, keto, and gummy supplement ASINs should note that a single default order can immobilise a seller’s entire commercial infrastructure within 7–10 business days.

🔒
Full strategic analysis in PatSnap Eureka
Unlock full strategic analysis of this dietary supplement patent enforcement action in the Wyoming District Court.
Claim scope analysisComparable enforcement actionsAxcess licensing strategy
Unlock full analysis →
Analysis powered by PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore in Eureka ↗
Frequently asked questions

Axcess v Vitalux — key questions answered

Still have questions? PatSnap Eureka can answer them instantly from patent and litigation data. Ask Eureka ↗
PatSnap Eureka

Assess your FTO exposure against Axcess Global Sciences supplement patents

If your brand sells ACV or keto gummy products in the U.S. market, this default judgment signals active enforcement risk. Use PatSnap Eureka to run an FTO analysis against US11020362B2 and US11241403B2 and monitor new actions by Axcess Global Sciences.

Ask anything about this case.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.
Powered by PatSnap Eureka
Link copied to clipboard

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.