Erchonia v. Skinny Me America: Low-Level Laser Patent Dispute Settles in 225 Days
Erchonia Corporation, a pioneer in low-level laser therapy, sued Skinny Me America LLC and two named individuals for allegedly infringing two body contouring laser patents — US7947067B2 and US9149650B2 — covering the competing ‘Skinny Me America Green Laser’ device. The parties reached a complete settlement via court-ordered mediation on November 26, 2024, with a consent injunction to follow.
Laser body contouring patent dispute ends in mediated settlement with consent injunction
Filed on April 16, 2024, in the Middle District of Florida, this infringement action pits Erchonia Corporation LLC — a leading developer of low-level laser therapy (LLLT) devices — against Skinny Me America LLC and two individual defendants, Ruben Rothschild and William Lutz. The asserted patents, US7947067B2 and US9149650B2, protect low-level laser-based body contouring technology, and the accused product is identified as the ‘Skinny Me America Green Laser,’ competing directly with Erchonia’s LuxMaster Slim device.
The case resolved through court-ordered mediation held on November 26, 2024 — just one day before the court formally closed the case on November 27, 2024. According to the mediation report filed with the court, all parties and their trial counsel attended with full settlement authority, and the case was completely settled. Notably, the parties agreed to jointly submit a proposed consent injunction for the court’s consideration, suggesting the settlement included an agreement by the defendants to cease the allegedly infringing activities.
The 225-day resolution is consistent with a case where commercial leverage favored a negotiated exit: individual defendants with limited resources, a clearly defined accused product, and two asserted patents covering core LLLT body contouring methods. The anticipated consent injunction is a meaningful outcome signal — it suggests Erchonia likely secured a prohibition on future sales or use of the accused device. Financial terms, royalty arrangements, and any admissions of liability remain undisclosed on the public docket.
Filing to Case Settled in 225 days
225 days from filing to mediated settlement — faster than the typical FLMD patent case lifecycle
Mediated settlement with consent injunction: what it means for both parties
Court-ordered mediation produced a complete, binding settlement
Under the court’s mediation order, all parties — including individual defendants Rothschild and Lutz — attended with requisite authority. A complete settlement was reached on November 26, 2024, and the mediation officer reported the outcome to the court. The parties then jointly committed to filing a proposed consent injunction, making this a structured resolution rather than a simple voluntary dismissal.
Mediated settlement + consent injunctionErchonia likely secured an injunction against the accused laser device
The proposed consent injunction — agreed to jointly by both sides — typically signals that the defendant agrees to stop the accused conduct as part of the settlement. For Erchonia, this is consistent with its broader enforcement strategy: eliminating competing LLLT devices from the market rather than simply collecting royalties. The two asserted patents remain intact and enforceable against other potential infringers.
Injunctive relief anticipatedSkinny Me America and individuals likely exit with a cease-and-desist obligation
By agreeing to a consent injunction, Skinny Me America LLC and the individual defendants — Rothschild and Lutz — appear to have accepted restrictions on their ability to continue selling or operating the accused green laser device. The financial terms are not public, but the inclusion of individual defendants alongside the LLC suggests Erchonia pursued personal liability, a negotiating pressure point that likely shaped the settlement contours.
Operational restrictions likely imposedErchonia’s LLLT patent portfolio gains renewed market deterrence
A settled case with a consent injunction reinforces the credibility of Erchonia’s patent enforcement program in the body contouring laser space. Competitors and distributors operating green laser slim devices should treat US7947067B2 and US9149650B2 as live enforcement risks. The involvement of individual defendants also signals that Erchonia is willing to pierce the corporate veil where operators are closely tied to alleged infringement.
Active enforcement risk for LLLT competitorsFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Erchonia Corporation LLC | Company | Low-level laser therapy device manufacturer — holder of US7947067B2 and US9149650B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Skinny Me America LLC | Company | Body contouring laser device seller and two individual operators alleged to infringe Erchonia’s LLLT patentsSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | Ruben Rothschild | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Co-Defendant | William Lutz | Individual | Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Scott Warren Dangler | Attorney | Counsel for Erchonia Corporation LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Scott W. Dangler, PA | Law Firm | Representing Erchonia Corporation LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant counsel | Luke Charles Lirot. | Attorney | Counsel for Skinny Me America LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant law firm | Luke Charles Lirot PA | Law Firm | Representing Skinny Me America LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Florida Middle District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The mediation report filed November 27, 2024 confirms a complete settlement across all parties, with a consent injunction to be jointly submitted. The phrasing ‘case had been completely settled’ leaves no claims outstanding. The commitment to a consent injunction — rather than a simple dismissal — is analytically significant: it suggests the settlement includes affirmative obligations on the defendants, most likely a prohibition on continued use or sale of the accused Skinny Me America Green Laser device. Financial terms are not disclosed.
US7947067B2 & US9149650B2 — Low-Level Laser Body Contouring Technology
US7947067B2 (App. No. US11/409408) and US9149650B2 (App. No. US14/336401) both protect technology in the low-level laser therapy space, specifically addressing non-invasive body contouring methods and device configurations using low-power laser emission. These patents cover the type of green laser technology marketed in medical aesthetics and wellness clinics for fat reduction and body sculpting — a field where Erchonia Corporation has established foundational IP. The two patents represent successive generations of Erchonia’s LLLT patent portfolio.
For competitors in the aesthetic laser device market, these two patents represent a significant clearance hurdle. Erchonia’s willingness to enforce both patents simultaneously — and against individual operators as well as corporate entities — signals an aggressive portfolio management posture. Any manufacturer, distributor, or clinic operator working with green laser body contouring devices should treat this patent pair as active enforcement risk, particularly in the context of the anticipated consent injunction arising from this case.
Should you run an FTO against US7947067B2 and US9149650B2?
If your business manufactures, imports, distributes, or operates any low-level laser device marketed for body contouring, fat reduction, or aesthetic slimming, both patents asserted in this case are directly relevant to your freedom-to-operate analysis. The consent injunction outcome signals that Erchonia is actively monitoring the market and willing to move quickly against competitors — including individual operators. Clinics and resellers are not insulated from enforcement risk.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map your device’s technical specifications against the claim language of US7947067B2 and US9149650B2, identify prosecution history that may limit claim scope, and surface prior art landscapes relevant to potential design-arounds. Eureka also tracks Erchonia’s full patent portfolio and litigation history, enabling continuous monitoring of new filings in the LLLT body contouring space.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US7947067B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar LLLT Patent Infringement Cases in U.S. District Courts
Cases involving low-level laser therapy patent enforcement in U.S. district courts, including prior Erchonia Corporation actions asserting body contouring device patents.
What this case signals for the low-level laser therapy IP landscape
Erchonia’s rapid settlement with a consent injunction reinforces its position as the dominant enforcer in the LLLT body contouring space.
Consent injunctions in patent settlements are a stronger outcome than damages alone
Where a patent holder secures a consent injunction as part of settlement, the accused product is typically removed from the market. For LLLT competitors, this case signals that Erchonia is not just seeking licensing revenue — it is protecting market exclusivity. Any operator of a competing green laser slim device should conduct patent clearance before commercialisation.
Individual defendants raise the litigation stakes and accelerate settlements
Naming Ruben Rothschild and William Lutz personally alongside Skinny Me America LLC is a deliberate litigation tactic. Personal exposure removes the LLC shield and creates direct financial pressure on key decision-makers. This approach is consistent with faster resolution timelines and stronger settlement terms for the patent holder — as this 225-day outcome suggests.
Erchonia v Skinny — key questions answered
Erchonia Corporation LLC asserted two patents: US7947067B2 and US9149650B2, both covering low-level laser therapy technology for body contouring. The accused product was the Skinny Me America Green Laser device, which Erchonia alleged competed directly with its LuxMaster Slim device.
The case resolved via court-ordered mediation on November 26, 2024, with a complete settlement reported. The parties agreed to jointly submit a proposed consent injunction, which typically means the defendants agreed to stop selling or operating the accused device. Financial settlement terms are not disclosed in the public record.
Naming individual defendants alongside a corporate entity like Skinny Me America LLC is a litigation strategy to create personal financial exposure for key operators. This removes the limited liability shield of the LLC and increases pressure to settle. The tactic is consistent with the relatively fast 225-day resolution seen in this case.
The settlement with a consent injunction signals that Erchonia is actively enforcing US7947067B2 and US9149650B2 against market competitors. Operators, distributors, and clinic owners using or selling green laser slim devices that are not licensed under these patents face meaningful infringement exposure. A freedom-to-operate analysis against Erchonia’s LLLT portfolio is advisable.
The case lasted 225 days, from filing on April 16, 2024 to closure on November 27, 2024. This is a relatively swift resolution for a patent infringement action in the Middle District of Florida, consistent with cases where commercial and personal pressure on defendants — including named individuals — accelerates settlement.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.