Blackstone v. LoCo Crazy Good Cookers: Griddle Patent Dismissed With Prejudice in 39 Days
North Atlantic Imports LLC, trading as Blackstone, asserted US10660473B2 — covering convective heating control for griddles — against LoCo Crazy Good Cookers Inc. in the Georgia Middle District Court. The parties filed a stipulated dismissal with prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) just 39 days after filing, with each side bearing its own costs, suggesting a private resolution.
A griddle patent dispute resolved before discovery even began
On May 5, 2025, North Atlantic Imports LLC — the company behind the Blackstone outdoor cooking brand — filed a patent infringement action against LoCo Crazy Good Cookers Inc. in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia, assigned to Judge Clay D. Land. The asserted patent, US10660473B2, covers a system, device, and method for controlling convective heating of a griddle — technology central to the flat-top outdoor cooking market in which both companies compete.
The dispute ended on June 13, 2025, just 39 days after filing, when both parties filed a joint stipulation of dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). The dismissal is with prejudice, meaning Blackstone cannot re-file the same claims against LoCo on this patent. All claims and counterclaims were extinguished. Each party was left to bear its own legal costs, which is atypical of a pure defendant win and consistent with a negotiated resolution.
The 39-day timeline is notably short — the case closed before any substantive court filings such as a claim construction order or discovery schedule would typically materialise. The mutual cost-bearing arrangement further suggests the parties reached a commercial accommodation, potentially a licence, cross-licence, or product design change, though the specific terms remain confidential and are not disclosed in the public docket.
Filing to Dismissed with Prejudice in 39 days
39 days — well below the median district court patent case lifespan of 2–3 years
Dismissed with prejudice: what the joint stipulation means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii): a consensual, court-free exit
A stipulated dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) requires agreement from all parties who have appeared and needs no court order to take effect. The ‘with prejudice’ designation is the critical qualifier here: it bars Blackstone from re-asserting the same patent claims against LoCo based on the same accused conduct, making this a permanent resolution of the dispute as filed.
Permanent bar on re-filingBlackstone’s patent survives, but re-assertion is barred
Dismissal with prejudice does not invalidate US10660473B2 — the patent remains in force and enforceable against third parties. However, Blackstone has permanently waived the right to sue LoCo on these specific claims. The mutual cost-bearing arrangement, rather than a fee award to either side, suggests Blackstone may have secured non-litigation value — such as a licence fee or design commitment — not visible in the public record.
Patent intact; re-suit barredLoCo exits litigation — but the patent cloud remains
LoCo Crazy Good Cookers secured dismissal of all claims against it and all counterclaims it may have filed, without paying attorneys’ fees to Blackstone. The ‘with prejudice’ nature protects LoCo from this specific lawsuit being revived. However, US10660473B2 remains valid and could be asserted against LoCo’s future products not covered by any private arrangement reached between the parties.
Claims extinguished; patent still liveRapid resolution signals commercial pragmatism in outdoor cooking IP
The 39-day lifecycle — from filing to stipulated dismissal — is consistent with parties who filed suit to accelerate commercial negotiations rather than pursue full litigation. In the competitive outdoor cooking and griddle market, this pattern typically signals that IP is being used as a strategic lever. Competitors in the convective griddle heating space should monitor whether US10660473B2 surfaces in future enforcement actions against other market participants.
Possible private licence dealFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | NORTH ATLANTIC IMPORTS LLC | Company | Outdoor cooking appliance brand (Blackstone) — holder of US10660473B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | LOCO CRAZY GOOD COOKERS INC | Company | LoCo Crazy Good Cookers Inc. — outdoor cooking appliance manufacturerSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | BARCLAY VALLOTTON | Attorney | Counsel for NORTH ATLANTIC IMPORTS LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | KANA CAPLAN | Attorney | Counsel for NORTH ATLANTIC IMPORTS LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | JOSEPH C SHARP | Attorney | Counsel for LOCO CRAZY GOOD COOKERS INCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge CLAY D. LAND | Judge | Georgia Middle District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The stipulation is precise: all claims and counterclaims are dismissed with prejudice, and no party receives a cost or fee award. The ‘with prejudice’ language carries res judicata effect, permanently barring Blackstone from re-litigating these specific claims against LoCo. The mutual cost-bearing term is notable — courts award fees to defendants in exceptional cases, so its absence here does not indicate a defendant victory; rather, it is consistent with a negotiated exit in which both parties conceded value outside the courtroom.
US10660473B2 — convective heating control system for griddles
US10660473B2, filed under application number US15/582682, protects a system, device, and method for controlling convective heating in a griddle cooking appliance. The patent covers the control architecture — sensors, airflow management, and thermal regulation logic — that governs how heat is distributed across a griddle cooking surface. This is a utility patent in the outdoor cooking and appliance control domain, protecting not merely the physical structure of a griddle but the intelligent thermal management methodology that defines premium cooking performance.
As the flat-top griddle market has expanded rapidly — driven by brands including Blackstone itself — patents covering precise heat control represent a meaningful competitive moat. A competitor who replicates the convective heating control approach covered by US10660473B2 without a licence faces infringement exposure. The fact that Blackstone asserted this patent within months of a commercial dispute arising, and obtained a with-prejudice resolution in under six weeks, suggests the claims are considered commercially potent and litigation-ready by the patent holder.
Should your griddle product be cleared against US10660473B2?
Any company designing, manufacturing, or importing outdoor griddle appliances with convective heating control functionality should evaluate their exposure to US10660473B2. The patent’s claim scope — covering the system, device, and method of controlling convective heating — is broad enough to potentially capture competing products that use airflow or thermal management logic to regulate griddle surface temperature. This applies to OEM manufacturers, private-label brands, and component suppliers operating in the outdoor cooking appliance supply chain.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the independent and dependent claims of US10660473B2 against your product’s technical architecture, identify prior art that may limit claim scope, and flag design-around pathways. Given that Blackstone has already demonstrated willingness to assert this patent in federal court, running an FTO review before product launch or market entry in the convective griddle category is a commercially prudent step — not a theoretical one.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US10660473B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar patent infringement cases in outdoor cooking and appliance control
Patent disputes over griddle and outdoor cooking appliance technology in U.S. district courts — filtered by technology class and enforcement patterns similar to this Middle District of Georgia action.
What this case signals for the outdoor cooking and griddle IP landscape
A 39-day patent suit ending in a mutual cost-bearing dismissal is rarely accidental — it carries strategic implications for the entire sector.
Short-duration patent suits often signal licensing leverage, not trial intent
When a patent infringement complaint resolves within weeks — before any scheduling order, claim construction, or discovery — it typically suggests the filing itself was the negotiating catalyst. Competitors in the outdoor cooking space should treat this pattern as a signal that Blackstone is prepared to enforce US10660473B2 aggressively and quickly.
Dismissal with prejudice protects LoCo but does not neutralise the patent
US10660473B2 remains fully enforceable against any party other than LoCo (to the extent covered by any private arrangement). Companies developing griddle convective heating technology who have not been party to this action remain exposed to infringement assertions from Blackstone. An FTO analysis against this patent is warranted for any competitor in this product category.
NORTH v LOCO — key questions answered
The case was dismissed with prejudice on June 13, 2025, by joint stipulation under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). All claims and counterclaims were permanently resolved. Each party bore its own costs and attorneys’ fees. The dismissal occurred just 39 days after the complaint was filed on May 5, 2025.
Blackstone (North Atlantic Imports LLC) asserted US10660473B2, filed under application number US15/582682. The patent covers a system, device, and method for controlling convective heating of a griddle — a technology directly relevant to the flat-top outdoor cooking appliance market in which both companies compete.
Dismissal with prejudice means Blackstone cannot re-file the same infringement claims against LoCo Crazy Good Cookers based on the same accused conduct. However, US10660473B2 itself remains valid and enforceable. Blackstone retains full rights to assert it against other parties, and it could potentially be re-asserted against LoCo for different products or conduct not covered by any private arrangement reached between the parties.
The public record does not disclose the specific reason. However, a 39-day resolution before any substantive court activity — combined with a mutual cost-bearing arrangement — is consistent with parties who used the complaint as a catalyst for commercial negotiations. This pattern typically suggests a private resolution such as a licensing agreement, royalty arrangement, or product modification commitment was reached, though these terms are not publicly available.
No. The dismissal resolves the dispute only between Blackstone and LoCo Crazy Good Cookers. US10660473B2 remains a live, enforceable patent. Other manufacturers of griddle appliances with convective heating control systems should conduct their own freedom-to-operate analysis against this patent’s claims before commercialising competing products. Blackstone’s willingness to litigate confirms it is prepared to enforce the patent.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.