Infringement action filed 13 May 2025 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia and closed 7 Aug 2025, with US12172695B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
A catalytic converter guard for protecting a catalytic converter on a motor vehicle. The catalytic converter guard can include a set of mounting flanges, an input guard plate, an output guard plate, and a bottom plate coupled to the set of mounting flanges and the input and output guard plates. The set of mounting flanges can be configured to be coupled to a set of frame rails of a motor vehicle. The input guard plate can be configured to be positioned adjacent an input of at least one catalytic converter and can include at least one cutout shaped to permit at least one input exhaust pipe to pass therethrough. The output guard plate can be configured to be positioned adjacent an output of the at least one catalytic converter and can include at least one cutout shaped to permit at least one output exhaust pipe to pass therethrough.
Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket.Compare both portfolios
Outcome
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim
"Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to the stipulated dismissal with prejudice of all claims asserted in this action with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs."
Case 5:25-cv-00194 · M.D. Ga. · closed 7 August 2025
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
5:25-cv-00194 is a patent infringement action brought by Monroe Truck Equipment Inc against Super Lawn Truck Inc, filed on 13 May 2025 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia. The case closed on 7 August 2025.
Which patent was asserted in 5:25-cv-00194?
US12172695B2 (“Catalytic converter guard”), assigned to MONROE TRUCK EQUIPMENT, INC., currently active. The record also lists CAT CAGE Mark.
How was case 5:25-cv-00194 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: "Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff and Defendant have agreed to the stipulated dismissal with prejudice of all claims asserted in this action with each party to bear its own attorneys’ fees, expenses, and costs."
What does dismissal with prejudice mean?
A dismissal with prejudice permanently ends the claims that were filed, so the same claims cannot be brought again against that defendant. It is the usual form when the parties have settled.
How long did case 5:25-cv-00194 take?
86 calendar days, from filing on 13 May 2025 to closure on 7 August 2025.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 5:25-cv-00194?
Chief Judge Marc T Treadwell presided. Michael T Piery, Neil A Brunetz and Roberto Christian Arbulu are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Monroe Truck Equipment. William F Long III appears for defendant Super Lawn Truck.
Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 5:25-cv-00194 and do not constitute legal advice.Ask your own question
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 5:25-cv-00194 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.
Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.
No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.
No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.
Patsnap Eureka
Eureka AI Agent
Help us improve
Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.
