Book a demo
Integra Mission Critical v. Cummings Electrical — UPS Air Energy Storage Patent Dispute | PatSnap
Explore in Eureka
Case ID3:24-cv-00238
FiledJan 2024
ClosedFeb 2024
Patent Litigation

Integra Mission Critical v. Cummings Electrical — Remanded to Texas State Court in 16 Days

Integra Mission Critical, LLC filed an infringement action against Cummings Electrical, LP over US11744047B2, a patent covering air energy storage powered uninterruptible power supply systems. The federal court dismissed Cummings Electrical’s declaratory judgment action without prejudice and remanded all remaining claims to the 116th Judicial Court, Dallas, Texas — resolving the federal jurisdictional question in just 16 days.

Resolution time
16days
16 days — among the fastest federal dispositions in Texas patent cases
Patents asserted
1
US11744047B2 — air energy storage powered uninterruptible power supply
Outcome
Dismissed without Prejudice
Federal claims dismissed without prejudice; case continues in Texas state court
Cost ruling
Not specified
No cost ruling recorded in the public federal docket
Published by PatSnap Insights Team · Verified by PatSnap Eureka Data
Case overview

Federal jurisdictional contest resolved in 16 days — UPS patent fight moves to Dallas state court

On January 30, 2024, Integra Mission Critical, LLC filed an infringement action in the Northern District of Texas against Cummings Electrical, LP, asserting US11744047B2 — a patent covering air energy storage powered uninterruptible power supply (UPS) systems. Cummings Electrical, an electrical contractor operating in Texas, had apparently sought to establish federal jurisdiction, likely via a declaratory judgment counterclaim, before the matter was tested on jurisdictional grounds.

The court issued an order on February 5, 2024, prompting both sides to brief the jurisdictional question. Integra filed a Motion to Remand to State Court on February 9, and Cummings Electrical filed a brief in support of federal jurisdiction on February 12. By February 15, the court granted Integra’s motion: Cummings Electrical’s declaratory judgment action was dismissed without prejudice, and all remaining claims and counterclaims were remanded to the 116th Judicial Court, Dallas, Texas.

The 16-day federal lifespan of this case is notable — it reflects a clean jurisdictional dispute rather than a merits contest. The rapid resolution suggests the court found no sufficient basis for federal subject-matter jurisdiction. What remains unknown is the current posture of the litigation in Dallas state court, any settlement discussions, and the full scope of claims Integra is pursuing. The substantive infringement question concerning US11744047B2 remains unresolved in the public record.

Case at a glance
Case no.3:24-cv-00238
CourtTexas Northern
Judge/
FiledJanuary 30, 2024
ClosedFebruary 15, 2024
Duration16 days
OutcomeDismissed without Prejudice
Verdict causeInfringement Action
BasisDismissed without Prejudice
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 / Texas Northern District Court via PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore similar cases ↗
Case timeline

Filing to voluntary dismissal in 16 days

16 days — among the fastest federal dispositions in Texas patent cases

Case timeline: Complaint filed May 13 2025, FEB–MAR — 16 days total Horizontal timeline showing the three key events in Integra Mission Critical, LLC v Cummings Electrical, LP from filing to voluntary dismissal. Source: PACER, Texas Northern District Court. JAN 30 2024 Complaint filed FEB–MAR 2024 Pre-trial proceedings FEB 15 2024 Dismissed without prejudice 16 DAYS TOTAL
Dismissal terms

Federal declaratory judgment dismissed; infringement claims remanded to Dallas state court

Legal mechanism

Why the case was remanded rather than decided

A remand occurs when a federal court determines it lacks proper subject-matter jurisdiction over a case. Here, the court granted Integra’s Motion to Remand, indicating that Cummings Electrical had not established a sufficient basis for federal jurisdiction — most likely because the declaratory judgment action did not raise a genuine federal question or meet diversity requirements as structured.

Jurisdiction — remand to state court
Dismissal scope

Dismissed without prejudice — Cummings can refile the DJ claim

The declaratory judgment action filed by Cummings Electrical was dismissed without prejudice, meaning it was not decided on the merits and Cummings retains the right to refile that claim under appropriate circumstances. This is a procedural outcome, not a substantive loss. The underlying infringement dispute between the parties is still live — it has simply moved to the 116th Judicial Court in Dallas, Texas.

Without prejudice — refiling possible
What happens next

Infringement merits will be tested in Dallas state court

All remaining claims and counterclaims — including Integra’s core infringement allegations concerning US11744047B2 — continue in the 116th Judicial Court, Dallas, Texas. State court patent proceedings are less common and can involve different procedural timelines than federal district courts. The outcome of the Dallas proceeding will determine whether Cummings Electrical is found to infringe the asserted UPS patent.

Litigation continues in Dallas
Strategic read

Jurisdictional maneuvering suggests contested venue strategy

The fact that Cummings Electrical filed a brief actively supporting federal jurisdiction — rather than consenting to remand — suggests the defendant believed federal court offered a more favourable forum, possibly for invalidity or declaratory judgment purposes. Integra’s successful remand motion keeps the dispute in a Texas state venue, which may be perceived as more plaintiff-friendly or better aligned with Integra’s litigation strategy.

Venue strategy — plaintiff prevailed
Legal analysis based on PACER docket records for case 3:24-cv-00238 and PatSnap Eureka litigation intelligence Search PatSnap Eureka ↗
Parties and representation

Full party and counsel information

RoleNameTypeDetail
PlaintiffIntegra Mission Critical, LLCCompanyMission-critical power technology company — holder of US11744047B2Search in Eureka ↗
DefendantCummings Electrical, LPCompanyTexas-based electrical contractor, Cummings Electrical, LPSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselDale Owen FreschAttorneyCounsel for Integra Mission Critical, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselRichard Anderson SessionsAttorneyCounsel for Integra Mission Critical, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Plaintiff counselStephanie H. CookAttorneyCounsel for Integra Mission Critical, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselGeorge R. SchultzAttorneyCounsel for Cummings Electrical, LPSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselMichael E. HassettAttorneyCounsel for Cummings Electrical, LPSearch in Eureka ↗
Defendant counselStephen D. HarrisonAttorneyCounsel for Cummings Electrical, LPSearch in Eureka ↗
Presiding judgeJudge /Chief JudgeTexas Northern District Court — Chief JudgeSearch in Eureka ↗
Official verdict

Stipulation of dismissal — official text

“Pursuant to the court’s February 5, 2024 Order (Doc. 9), before the court is Plaintiff Integra Mission Critical, LLC’s (“Plaintiff”) Motion to Remand to State Court (“Plaintiff’s Motion”) (Doc. 10), filed February 9, 2024; and Defendant Cummings Electrical, LP’s (“Defendant”) [Redacted] Brief in Support of Jurisdiction (“Defendant’s Brief”) (Doc. 14), filed February 12, 2024.* Having considered Plaintiff’s Motion, Defendant’s Brief, the record, and relevant law, the court determines that Plaintiff’s Motion should be granted; Defendant’s declaratory judgment action should be dismissed without prejudice; and all remaining claims and counterclaims should be remanded to the 116th Judicial Court, Dallas, Texas for further proceedings.”
Source: PACER Docket, Case 3:24-cv-00238, Texas Northern District Court · Filed February 15, 2024

The court’s order is procedural rather than substantive — it resolves only the question of which court should hear the case, not whether infringement occurred. By granting the remand and dismissing Cummings Electrical’s declaratory judgment action without prejudice, the federal court left all merits questions entirely open. Neither party has won or lost on the underlying patent claims. The phrasing ‘without prejudice’ is significant: Cummings Electrical retains the right to re-raise its declaratory judgment arguments in an appropriate forum.

PACER case 3:24-cv-00238 · Public docket record Explore in Eureka ↗
Patent at issue

US11744047B2 — Air Energy Storage Powered Uninterruptible Power Supply

Publication No.US11744047B2
Application No.US17/652074
Patent details
AssigneeIntegra Mission Critical, LLC
ProductUS11744047B2 — air energy storage UPS system
Publication typeB2 — grant (with prior publication)
Cited in actionJanuary 30, 2024

US11744047B2 (application number US17/652074) protects an air energy storage powered uninterruptible power supply system — a technology that uses compressed or stored air as the energy medium for power continuity, as opposed to conventional electrochemical battery systems. This represents a distinct and emerging approach within the broader UPS and distributed energy storage market, with relevance to data centres, industrial facilities, and other mission-critical infrastructure applications that demand high reliability and potentially reduced chemical hazard profiles compared to lithium-ion alternatives.

Strategically, this patent positions Integra Mission Critical, LLC in a niche but commercially significant segment of the power continuity market. As data centre operators and industrial buyers increasingly evaluate alternatives to battery-based UPS systems — driven by sustainability mandates, safety concerns, and total cost of ownership — air energy storage technology is likely to attract more competitive activity. US11744047B2 could serve as a foundational IP asset in that space, and the decision to enforce it against an electrical contractor suggests Integra is willing to pursue infringement broadly across the deployment chain.

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

Should you run an FTO against US11744047B2?

Any company designing, manufacturing, distributing, or installing uninterruptible power supply systems that incorporate non-battery energy storage — including compressed air, pneumatic, or hybrid air-based mechanisms — should assess exposure to US11744047B2. The enforcement of this patent against a downstream electrical contractor signals that Integra is not limiting its claims to direct competitors. OEMs, system integrators, and electrical contractors active in mission-critical power installations in Texas and beyond should treat this patent as a live FTO risk.

PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent allows R&D and IP teams to map the claims of US11744047B2 against their product architecture and identify freedom-to-operate risks before they escalate to litigation. Eureka can also monitor for continuation filings, related patent families, and new assertions tied to Integra Mission Critical’s portfolio — giving procurement and product teams early warning if claim scope expands into adjacent UPS and energy storage designs.

PatSnap Eureka FTO Search

Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11744047B2 to assess your product’s exposure

Run FTO in Eureka →
Related litigation

Similar patent cases in UPS, energy storage, and power continuity technology

PatSnap Eureka tracks related litigation across truck body equipment, vehicle accessories, and comparable infringement actions in the Georgia district system.

🔍
Access 40+ similar cases in PatSnap Eureka
Integra Mission Critical, LLC patent enforcement history, Texas Northern case history, Integra Mission Critical, LLC’s full IP portfolio, and comparable case analysis
UPS patent — Texas DJ actionAir storage energy patent suitMission-critical power infringementContractor defendant patent case
Unlock similar cases in Eureka →
Strategic implications

What this case signals for the mission-critical power IP landscape

A fast federal remand in a UPS patent dispute highlights the growing importance of jurisdictional strategy in emerging energy storage IP enforcement.

Air energy storage UPS patents are entering active enforcement

US11744047B2 represents a newer class of power continuity technology moving beyond traditional battery-based UPS systems. Integra’s willingness to litigate against an electrical contractor — not just a direct competitor — suggests an enforcement-forward IP strategy that product teams and distributors in the mission-critical power sector should monitor closely.

Federal vs. state court forum matters in patent enforcement

This case is an uncommon example of patent infringement claims proceeding in state court following a failed federal removal. Companies facing infringement claims should evaluate not just the merits, but where those claims can and will be heard — forum selection can materially affect discovery scope, timelines, and invalidity defences available to defendants.

🔒
Full strategic analysis in PatSnap Eureka
Includes sector IP trends, Judge Treadwell’s case history, and FTO risk assessment for the truck equipment space
Downstream enforcement signalsClaim scope risk — UPS sectorDallas state court patent trends
Unlock full analysis →
Analysis powered by PatSnap Eureka Litigation Intelligence Explore in Eureka ↗
Frequently asked questions

Integra v Cummings — key questions answered

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

Run your own FTO analysis on air energy storage patents

Use PatSnap Eureka to map US11744047B2 claims against your product design and flag related continuation risks. Set up monitoring alerts to track new assertions by Integra Mission Critical across the UPS and energy storage patent landscape.

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

Help us improve this page

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