Tee Turtle v. Just Play: Reversible Plush Patent Case Dismissed With Prejudice
Tee Turtle, LLC sued Just Play, LLC in the Delaware District Court alleging infringement of US10786746B2, a patent covering reversible plush toys including the ‘Flip-A-Mood’ product line. The case ended after just 112 days when Tee Turtle voluntarily dismissed its own claims with prejudice — permanently extinguishing its right to refile.
A Fast Exit: Tee Turtle Drops Its Own Patent Suit in Delaware
On October 10, 2024, Tee Turtle, LLC — creator of the popular ‘Reversible Plushies’ and ‘Flip-A-Mood’ plush toy line — filed an infringement action against Just Play, LLC in the Delaware District Court before Judge Richard G. Andrews. The suit centered on US10786746B2, a utility patent covering reversible plush toy technology, with Tee Turtle alleging that Just Play’s Joy & Sadness Plush and Fear & Anxiety Plush products encroached on its protected intellectual property.
The case closed on January 30, 2025, just 112 days after filing. Tee Turtle’s counsel at Dorsey & Whitney, LLP filed a notice of voluntary dismissal with prejudice under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). This mechanism — available as of right before the defendant serves an answer or motion for summary judgment — conclusively terminates the action. The ‘with prejudice’ designation means Tee Turtle cannot refile the same claims against Just Play based on the same patent and accused products.
The speed of resolution — under four months, with no record of a defendant appearance or responsive pleading on the public docket — strongly suggests the parties reached a private resolution, potentially a license, settlement payment, or product modification by Just Play. The public record is silent on financial terms. What is notable is that Tee Turtle chose a permanent rather than without-prejudice exit, which typically signals either a negotiated outcome satisfactory to the plaintiff or a strategic decision to cease pursuit of these specific claims.
Filing to Dismissed with Prejudice in 112 days
112 days — resolved before any substantive merits ruling, faster than the typical 12–24 month district court lifecycle
Dismissed with prejudice: what Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i): plaintiff’s unilateral exit right
Under FRCP Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i), a plaintiff may dismiss its own action without a court order before the defendant serves an answer or motion for summary judgment. This is a procedural right — no judicial approval needed. Tee Turtle exercised this right voluntarily. The ‘with prejudice’ election is notable: it goes beyond what the rule requires and permanently bars any future suit on the same claims.
Voluntary, no court order requiredTee Turtle permanently surrenders these claims against Just Play
By dismissing with prejudice, Tee Turtle cannot refile US10786746B2 infringement claims against Just Play for the accused ‘Joy & Sadness’ and ‘Fear & Anxiety’ plush products. This is a significant concession unless offset by a private settlement. The voluntary nature and early timing suggest Tee Turtle achieved its commercial objective — whether deterrence, a license, or product withdrawal — without protracted litigation.
Claims permanently extinguishedJust Play exits without admitting infringement or liability
No defendant appearance or responsive pleading appears on the public docket, and the dismissal carries no finding of infringement, invalidity, or liability. Just Play is effectively free from this specific action. However, the with-prejudice dismissal does not affect Tee Turtle’s ability to assert the same patent against different Just Play products or future designs — the protection is product- and claim-specific.
No liability finding on recordUS10786746B2 remains valid and enforceable against the market
The dismissal does not invalidate or limit US10786746B2. Tee Turtle retains full enforcement rights against other competitors in the reversible plush toy market. Other toy manufacturers selling emotionally-themed reversible plushies should treat this patent as active and enforceable. The rapid resolution without merits adjudication means no claim construction or invalidity findings entered the public record — leaving scope uncertainty intact.
Patent still fully enforceableFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Tee Turtle, LLC | Company | Reversible plush toy brand — holder of US10786746B2 covering reversible plush toy technologySearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Just Play, LLC | Company | Just Play, LLC — toy manufacturer accused of infringing reversible plush toy patentSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Alessandra Glorioso | Attorney | Counsel for Tee Turtle, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Case Collard | Attorney | Counsel for Tee Turtle, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Eric L. Schnabel | Attorney | Counsel for Tee Turtle, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Dorsey & Whitney, LLP | Law Firm | Representing Tee Turtle, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge Richard G. Andrews | Judge | Delaware District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The dismissal notice invokes Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) and expressly elects ‘with prejudice’ — language that goes beyond the default without-prejudice outcome available under that rule. The phrasing is unambiguous: Tee Turtle made an affirmative, irrevocable choice to permanently bar itself from refiling these claims. No merits were adjudicated and no claim construction was issued, meaning the scope and validity of US10786746B2 remain entirely unresolved by the courts. The commercial rationale behind this choice is not disclosed on the public record.
US10786746B2 — reversible plush toy design and construction
US10786746B2 (application number US15/849493) protects the design and construction of reversible plush toys — soft goods that can be inverted or ‘flipped’ to reveal a second character, expression, or design. This technology underpins the Tee Turtle ‘Reversible Plushies’ brand and the ‘Flip-A-Mood’ product range. The patent sits within the toy and novelty goods space, covering a specific structural and aesthetic approach to dual-sided plush construction that enables the emotionally expressive character switching central to Tee Turtle’s commercial identity.
Reversible plush toys have become a significant consumer trend, particularly among children and emotional wellness gift markets. US10786746B2 gives Tee Turtle a potential enforcement tool against any competitor manufacturing or selling mechanically similar reversible plush products. The Just Play accused products — the Joy & Sadness Plush and Fear & Anxiety Plush — suggest the emotionally-themed reversible format is being adopted across the toy industry, making this patent commercially valuable and litigation-relevant well beyond this single dispute.
Should your product team run an FTO against US10786746B2?
Any toy company, manufacturer, or retailer developing or sourcing reversible plush toys — particularly dual-sided emotionally-themed designs — should treat US10786746B2 as a live enforcement risk. This case demonstrates that Tee Turtle is prepared to litigate in Delaware federal court against direct competitors. The absence of an invalidity ruling means the patent’s claims have not been narrowed or tested in court. R&D and product teams should assess design clearance before launching or expanding reversible plush SKUs.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map US10786746B2’s claim boundaries against your specific product design, identify related continuations or design patents in Tee Turtle’s portfolio, and surface prior art that may support a validity challenge if needed. For toy industry IP teams managing a portfolio of novelty and plush products, a targeted Eureka search can identify workaround design paths and monitor for new Tee Turtle filings in this category.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US10786746B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar reversible toy and novelty plush patent cases in US federal courts
Cases involving toy design patents and plush product infringement in Delaware District Court and comparable first-instance federal venues.
What this case signals for the plush toy and novelty IP landscape
A with-prejudice exit in under four months points to rapid commercial resolution — and a patent holder still actively defending its reversible plush IP.
Early dismissal with prejudice often signals a negotiated resolution
When a plaintiff dismisses with prejudice this early — before any defendant appearance — it typically suggests a private commercial outcome: a license, product modification, or payment. Tee Turtle’s willingness to permanently close the case suggests it received sufficient value. Competitors should not assume this patent is being abandoned.
US10786746B2 is still live and covers a commercially hot product category
Reversible plush toys are a mainstream consumer goods category with multiple market entrants. No invalidity finding was issued in this case. Toy companies designing or sourcing emotionally-themed reversible plushies should conduct an FTO assessment against US10786746B2 before commercialisation or market entry.
Tee v Just — key questions answered
The public record does not disclose the reason. Tee Turtle filed the Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) notice voluntarily before Just Play entered an appearance. The with-prejudice election permanently bars refiling. This pattern is consistent with a private settlement or licensing agreement, though no such terms are confirmed in court filings.
US10786746B2 (application US15/849493) covers reversible plush toy technology — soft toys that invert to reveal a second design or emotional expression. In this case it was asserted against Just Play’s Joy & Sadness Plush and Fear & Anxiety Plush products, which Tee Turtle alleged infringed its Flip-A-Mood and Reversible Plushies product line.
No. A voluntary dismissal with prejudice is a termination of the action, not a ruling on the merits. No claim construction, invalidity finding, or infringement determination was issued. US10786746B2 remains valid and enforceable. Tee Turtle retains full rights to assert it against other parties.
Not for the same claims and accused products covered by this action. The with-prejudice dismissal operates as a final adjudication on the merits as to those specific claims, barring Tee Turtle from refiling the same suit. However, future Just Play products not covered by this action, or different patent claims, could theoretically support a new action.
Tee Turtle was represented by Dorsey & Whitney, LLP, with attorneys Alessandra Glorioso, Case Collard, and Eric L. Schnabel listed as plaintiff agents. No defendant counsel appeared on the public docket before the case was dismissed. The case was assigned to Judge Richard G. Andrews in the Delaware District Court.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.