Infringement action filed 18 Dec 2025 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee and closed 30 Mar 2026, with 2 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: consent judgment.
Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.
Get an FTO claim chart
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Benjamin A. Saidman | Nugget Comfort LLC | Plaintiff |
| Elizabeth Ferrill | Nugget Comfort LLC | Plaintiff |
| Robert Earl Boston | Nugget Comfort LLC | Plaintiff |
From the record · verbatim"On December 18, 2025, Plaintiff Nugget Comfort, LLC (“Nugget Comfort”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee against Defendant Galaxy Home, LLC (“Galaxy Home”) asserting Galaxy Home was and is infringing on Nugget Comfort’s design patents, including (1) U.S. Patent No. D1,048,738 (“the D738 Patent”), and (2) U.S. Patent No. D1,055,547 (“the D547 Patent”) (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”). On March 25, 2026, Nugget Comfort and Galaxy Home entered into a Settlement Agreement to resolve this action. NOW, THEREFORE, Nugget Comfort and Galaxy Home having entered into a Settlement Agreement and Galaxy Home having consented to judgment as follows, IT IS ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED THAT: 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the parties to this Final Consent Judgment and has jurisdiction over the subject matter pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331 and 1338. 2. Nugget Comfort is a North Carolina limited liability company with an address at 200 Business Park Drive Butner, NC, 27509.Galaxy Home is a Delaware limited liability company with an address at The Corporation Trust Center, 1209 Orange Street Wilmington, DE, 19801 and its principal place of business at 725 Cool Springs Boulevard, Suite 550, Franklin, TN, 37067. 4. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) duly and lawfully issued the Asserted Patents. 5. Nugget Comfort is the owner of the Asserted Patents and any rights granted through the Asserted Patents. 6. The claims alleged by Nugget Comfort in the present lawsuit arise from Galaxy Home’s alleged manufacture, distribution to at least MoonPod.co, promotion, advertisement, offering for sale, and/or sale of its children’s play furniture, specifically the Tumblehouse Play Circle, the design of which Nugget Comfort has alleged infringes upon the Asserted Patents. 7. Galaxy Home, its officers, agents, servants, attorneys, and employees and any other persons who are in active concert or participation with any of them, have recognized the validity of the Asserted Patents and admitted to infringement of the Asserted Patents and are thus permanently restrained and enjoined from infringing upon the Asserted Patents, either directly or indirectly in any manner, including, but not limited to, the following: a. making, importing, promoting, offering, or exposing for sale, or selling the Tumblehouse Play Circle, models, or prototypes thereof, as well as any other products with designs substantially the same overall appearance as the claimed design of the Asserted Patents until after the expiration date of the Asserted Patents; b. assisting, aiding or attempting to assist or aid any other person or entity, including distributors or resellers (e.g., Galaxy Relaxation LLC d/b/a Moonpod.co), in performing any of the prohibited activities referred to in Paragraphs 7(a) above. Each party shall bear its own costs and attorneys’ fees associated with this action. 9. The execution of this Final Consent Judgment shall serve to bind and obligate the parties hereto. This Order shall constitute a final resolution of this matter and the case shall be dismissed, with prejudice, by Nugget Comfort. However, dismissal with prejudice of this action shall not have a preclusive effect on those who are not a party to this action, all claims against whom Nugget Comfort expressly reserves. 10. The jurisdiction of this Court is retained for the purpose of making any further orders necessary or proper from the construction or modification of this Final Consent Judgment, the enforcement thereof and the punishment of any violation thereof. Except as otherwise provided herein, this action is fully resolved with prejudice."
Case 3:25-cv-01469 · M.D. Tenn. · closed 30 March 2026
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
3:25-cv-01469 is a patent infringement action brought by Nugget Comfort LLC against Galaxy Home, LLC, filed on 18 Dec 2025 in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee. The case closed on 30 March 2026.
USD1048738S (“Set of modular cushions”), assigned to NUGGET COMFORT LLC, currently active; USD1055547S (“Chair”), assigned to NUGGET COMFORT LLC, currently active. The record also lists Tumblehouse Play Circle.
The recorded basis of termination is consent judgment. The termination text reads: "On December 18, 2025, Plaintiff Nugget Comfort, LLC (“Nugget Comfort”) filed a complaint in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee against Defendant Galaxy Home, LLC (“Galaxy Home”) asserting Galaxy Home was and is infringing on Nugget Comfort’s design patents, including (1) U.S. Patent No. D1,048,738 (“the D738 Patent”), and (2) U.S. Patent No. D1,055,547 (“the D547 Patent”) (collectively, “the Asserted Patents”). On March 25, 2026, Nugget Comfort and Galaxy Home entered into a Settlement Agreement to resolve this action. NOW, THEREFORE, Nugget Comfort and Gala
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.
102 calendar days, from filing on 18 Dec 2025 to closure on 30 March 2026.
Chief Judge Aleta A. Trauger presided. Benjamin A. Saidman, Elizabeth Ferrill and Robert Earl Boston are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Nugget Comfort.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 3:25-cv-01469 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.