Clayton International v. Nebraska Armes Aviation: Stipulated Dismissal in Aviation Patent Dispute
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
📋 Case Summary
| Case Name | Clayton International, Inc. v. Nebraska Armes Aviation, LLC, et al. |
| Case Number | 8:21-cv-00309 |
| Court | U.S. District Court, District of Nebraska |
| Duration | Aug 2021 – Feb 2026 4 years 6 months |
| Outcome | Stipulated Dismissal with Prejudice |
| Patents at Issue | |
| Accused Products | UH-60 VVIP Data Package |
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
Pursued patent infringement claims as the rights holder of US8317135B2, asserting that its intellectual property was commercially exploited without authorization.
🛡️ Defendant
Primary named defendant, joined by Nebraska Gas Turbine, Inc., ENC Products, LLC, Tracy Ogle, and Joey DeRousse, in a complex, multi-entity, multi-individual defense structure.
The Patent at Issue
This case involved US8317135B2, a patent tied to aviation systems technology applicable within the UH-60 rotary-wing aircraft platform, specifically implicated through the VVIP (Very Very Important Person) data configuration package.
- • Patent Number: US8317135B2
- • Application Number: US12/762921
- • Technology Area: Aviation systems, specifically for UH-60 rotary-wing aircraft platform
Developing products for the UH-60 platform?
Check if your aviation system design might infringe US8317135B2 or related patents before launch.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
The case concluded via a stipulated dismissal with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, filed jointly by all parties. This means all claims and defenses were dismissed with prejudice, preventing either party from relitigating these specific claims. Crucially, each party bore its own fees and costs, and no damages award or injunctive relief was publicly disclosed, strongly suggesting a negotiated resolution.
Key Legal Issues
The case’s resolution by stipulated dismissal carries no direct precedential value on infringement or validity. However, its procedural outcome offers strategic lessons. The prolonged **1,640-day duration** exceeded the median time to trial for patent cases, suggesting substantial procedural activity. The defendants’ robust **four-firm defense coalition** also illustrates resource-intensive defense preparation, often signaling anticipated complexity in claim construction, validity challenges, and technical expert preparation. Naming individual defendants alongside corporate entities implies potential allegations of personal involvement, a tactic used to increase litigation pressure and complicate settlement negotiations.
Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in aviation systems. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- View all related patents in the aviation systems space
- See which companies are most active in aviation IP
- Understand patent claim construction patterns
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own aviation technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents, like US8317135B2
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
UH-60 VVIP Data Package configurations
1 Patent at Issue
US8317135B2 remains valid
FTO Opportunities
Identify design-around strategies
✅ Key Takeaways
Stipulated Rule 41 dismissals with prejudice after prolonged litigation suggest both sides reached a cost-benefit inflection point without a clear merits winner.
Search related case law →Multi-defendant, multi-individual complaints in aviation IP cases require coordinated defense strategies across corporate and personal liability exposure.
Explore precedents →Frequently Asked Questions
The case involved U.S. Patent No. 8,317,135B2 (Application No. US12/762921), asserted in connection with the UH-60 VVIP Data Package product.
The case was resolved through a stipulated dismissal with prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41, with all parties bearing their own fees and costs. No damages or injunctive relief were publicly awarded.
No. A stipulated dismissal without a validity ruling leaves the patent presumptively valid under 35 U.S.C. § 282. The patent remains enforceable.
The accused product was the UH-60 VVIP Data Package, a specialized aviation product configuration for VIP transport operations involving the Sikorsky UH-60 helicopter platform.
Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join 18,000+ IP professionals using PatSnap Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyse competitive landscapes with AI-powered precision.
References
- PACER (Public Access to Court Electronic Records)
- USPTO Patent Full-Text Database – US8317135B2
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — 35 U.S.C. § 282
- Cornell Legal Information Institute — Fed. R. Civ. P. 41
- PatSnap — IP Intelligence Solutions for Law Firms
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. All case information is drawn from publicly available court records. For platform capabilities, visit PatSnap.