Wake 10, LLC v. Swell Ventures, LLC — Ballast Bag Patent Infringement Action
Wake 10, LLC filed suit in the Kansas District Court alleging Swell Ventures copied its 50lb ballast bag design and wakesurf accessories, asserting two patents covering marine sport equipment. The plaintiff voluntarily dismissed the action without prejudice after 140 days — before the defendant filed any answer or dispositive motion.
Marine accessory patent dispute ends before defendant responds
Wake 10, LLC, a marine sport accessories company and holder of patents US11840317B2 and US11225307B2, filed this infringement action on 3 May 2024 in the Kansas District Court against Swell Ventures, LLC. The complaint alleged that Swell Ventures’ 50lb ballast bag product closely resembled Wake 10’s own patented ballast bag design, and further implicated the Wakesurf Creator X4 Pro among the accused products.
On 20 September 2024 — just 140 days after filing — Wake 10 filed a notice of voluntary dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(i). Because Swell Ventures had not yet served an answer or motion for summary judgment, the dismissal was effective immediately and operated without prejudice. This means Wake 10 retains the right to refile the same claims against Swell Ventures in the future.
The speed of resolution and the without-prejudice nature of the dismissal suggests the parties may have reached a private commercial arrangement, or that Wake 10 is reassessing its litigation strategy — though the public record is silent on either point. No defendant counsel was recorded, and no merits ruling was issued, leaving the underlying patent validity and infringement questions entirely unresolved.
Filing to Voluntary dismissal in 140 days
140 days — resolved before defendant answered, faster than typical patent litigation
Voluntarily dismissed: what the Rule 41 exit means for both parties
Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i): plaintiff’s unilateral exit right
Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), a plaintiff may dismiss an action without a court order at any time before the defendant serves an answer or motion for summary judgment. Wake 10 exercised this right on 20 September 2024. The dismissal is self-executing — no judicial approval is required — and takes effect immediately upon filing of the notice.
No court order requiredWithout prejudice: the refiling right preserved
A without-prejudice dismissal means the plaintiff’s claims are not extinguished on the merits. Wake 10 can refile the same infringement claims against Swell Ventures, subject to applicable statutes of limitation. This contrasts with a with-prejudice dismissal, which would bar refiling permanently. The public record does not specify why Wake 10 chose to dismiss, and whether a settlement or licence was agreed privately is not disclosed.
Refiling right preservedSwell Ventures: no merits ruling, but exposure continues
Swell Ventures never filed an answer or engaged on the merits, so no court has ruled on infringement or validity of the asserted patents. While this dismissal removes the immediate litigation threat, the without-prejudice nature means Swell Ventures remains exposed to a refiled action. Continued sale of the accused ballast bag products carries ongoing commercial risk if Wake 10 elects to refile.
Exposure not extinguishedMarine accessories sector: design-around risk persists
The unresolved validity and infringement questions around US11840317B2 and US11225307B2 leave competitors in the ballast bag and wakesurf accessories market without definitive guidance. Companies marketing similar products — particularly weighted ballast bags for wake sports — should treat these patents as live enforcement risk and consider conducting freedom-to-operate analysis before expanding product lines.
Live patent risk for sectorFull party and counsel information
| Role | Name | Type | Detail |
|---|---|---|---|
| Plaintiff | Wake 10, LLC | Company | Marine sport accessories company — holder of US11840317B2 and US11225307B2Search in Eureka ↗ |
| Defendant | Swell Ventures, LLC | Company | Marine accessories seller allegedly copying Wake 10’s 50lb ballast bag designSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Christopher Michael DeBacker | Attorney | Counsel for Wake 10, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff counsel | Mark E. Brown | Attorney | Counsel for Wake 10, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Plaintiff law firm | Law Office Of Mark Brown, LLC | Law Firm | Representing Wake 10, LLCSearch in Eureka ↗ |
| Presiding judge | Judge N/A | Judge | Kansas District CourtSearch in Eureka ↗ |
Official order — verbatim text
The plaintiff’s notice invokes Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) and explicitly confirms that Swell Ventures had not served an answer or summary judgment motion — the precise procedural prerequisite for a unilateral, no-order-required dismissal. The notice further specifies Rule 41(a)(1)(B) as the authority for the without-prejudice effect. No merits ruling was issued, no claim construction occurred, and patent validity was never adjudicated, leaving Wake 10’s two asserted patents entirely intact as enforcement instruments.
US11840317B2 & US11225307B2 — Marine Ballast Bags and Wakesurf Accessories
US11840317B2 (application US17/577261) and US11225307B2 (application US16/818824) together cover Wake 10’s proprietary ballast bag technology and wakesurf accessory designs used in wake sports. Ballast bags are weighted water-fillable bags used on wake boats to create surf-quality wakes — a technically specialised product category where design and functional differentiation drives brand value. The asserted patents protect Wake 10’s specific implementations in this equipment class.
For the marine accessories sector, these patents represent meaningful IP barriers around the 50lb ballast bag form factor and the Wakesurf Creator X4 Pro product line. The fact that Wake 10 filed suit alleging a competitor’s product ‘strongly resembles’ its own suggests the patents cover design elements visible to end users — raising the enforcement profile for any brand seeking to market competing ballast bag products. Both patents are unencumbered by any adverse ruling from this proceeding.
Should your product team run an FTO against US11840317B2 and US11225307B2?
Any company designing, importing, or selling weighted ballast bags, wakesurf accessories, or related marine sport equipment should treat these two patents as active clearance risks. Wake 10’s willingness to litigate — and the without-prejudice exit that preserves refiling rights — signals an IP-active enforcement posture. R&D teams developing competing ballast bag products, particularly in the 50lb weight class or with similar form factors, face the highest exposure.
PatSnap Eureka’s FTO Search Agent can map the claim scope of US11840317B2 and US11225307B2 against your product specifications in minutes, flagging potentially blocking claims and identifying prior art that could support a validity challenge. For in-house IP teams and outside counsel advising marine accessories clients, Eureka provides continuous patent monitoring so you are alerted when Wake 10 files continuation applications or new enforcement actions.
Run a freedom-to-operate analysis on US11840317B2 to assess your product’s exposure
Run FTO in Eureka →Similar marine accessories patent infringement cases in US district courts
Browse patent infringement actions involving marine sport accessories and ballast equipment filed in Kansas and neighbouring US district courts.
What this case signals for the marine accessories IP landscape
An early voluntary exit without prejudice often signals more than a simple retreat — here is what IP teams should take away.
Without-prejudice exits are enforcement tools, not concessions
A Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) dismissal without prejudice preserves all claims for refiling. Patent holders sometimes use early voluntary dismissals to reset venue, refine claim construction strategy, or pressure defendants toward licensing — without burning their rights. Competitors in the marine accessories space should not read this dismissal as Wake 10 abandoning enforcement of its ballast bag patents.
Uncontested patents carry heightened infringement risk
Neither US11840317B2 nor US11225307B2 faced validity challenge in this proceeding. That means both patents emerge from this case with no litigation scar — no adverse claim construction, no IPR petition triggered, no obviousness finding. For product teams developing or selling ballast bag or wakesurf accessories, these patents now represent fully intact, tested enforcement assets.
Wake v Swell — key questions answered
Wake 10, LLC filed a patent infringement action against Swell Ventures, LLC in the Kansas District Court on 3 May 2024, asserting US11840317B2 and US11225307B2 over ballast bag and wakesurf accessories. The case was voluntarily dismissed without prejudice by Wake 10 on 20 September 2024 — 140 days after filing — before Swell Ventures filed any answer or dispositive motion.
Wake 10 asserted two patents: US11840317B2 (application US17/577261) and US11225307B2 (application US16/818824). Both patents relate to marine sport accessories, specifically covering ballast bag technology and wakesurf equipment including the Wakesurf Creator X4 Pro product line.
A voluntary dismissal without prejudice under Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) means no merits ruling was issued against Swell Ventures. However, Wake 10 retains the right to refile the same infringement claims in the future. Swell Ventures faces ongoing exposure if it continues selling the accused 50lb ballast bag products, as the underlying patent claims remain fully intact and uncontested.
Yes. Because the dismissal was entered without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)(B), Wake 10 may refile the same claims subject to applicable statutes of limitations. No court has ruled on infringement or patent validity, so Wake 10’s legal position is unchanged from the time of original filing.
The accused products identified in the case include a 50lb ballast bag that Wake 10 alleged strongly resembled its own patented product, along with marine sport accessories generally and the Wakesurf Creator X4 Pro. Wake 10 holds design and/or utility patent rights in these product categories under US11840317B2 and US11225307B2.
PatSnap Eureka searches patents and litigation data to answer instantly.