BambuLab USA, Inc. et al. v. Stratasys, Inc.

BambuLab USA, Inc. initiated this declaratory judgment action against Stratasys, Inc. in December 2024, seeking clarity regarding US Patent 9,592,660. The plaintiff, Bambu Lab, is a fast-growing consumer tech company based in Shenzhen, China, with operations including an office in Austin, Texas. They are known for designing and manufacturing popular desktop fused filament fabrication (FDM) 3D printers, such as the X1C, X1E, P1S, P1P, A1, and A1 Mini models, which have disrupted the 3D printing market with their affordability and advanced capabilities. The defendant, Stratasys, is an established American-Israeli global leader in industrial 3D printing and additive manufacturing solutions, holding a substantial portfolio of patents in the field. This declaratory judgment action by BambuLab appears to be a defensive maneuver in response to Stratasys's earlier patent infringement lawsuits filed in August 2024, which accused Bambu Lab's popular 3D printers of infringing various Stratasys patents.

The core of this dispute, as indicated by BambuLab's action, centers on US Patent 9,592,660, titled "Heated build platform and system for three dimensional printing methods." This patent broadly covers a system for 3D printing objects using high-temperature thermoplastics, specifically describing an apparatus that includes a heated build platform, a removable thin plate, and a high-temperature polymer coating designed to facilitate adhesion during printing and easy removal of finished objects upon cooling. The case is currently pending in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division, and was reassigned to Judge Alan D. Albright on March 27, 2025. This venue is notably significant in patent litigation due to Judge Albright's historical efforts to attract and expedite patent cases, although recent procedural changes aim to distribute cases more broadly within the district.

This litigation is particularly notable for its potential impact on the rapidly evolving 3D printing industry. It pits an industry pioneer with extensive foundational patents (Stratasys) against a newer, highly successful entrant (Bambu Lab) that has gained significant market share in the consumer segment. The asserted patent on heated build platforms is considered a fundamental technology in 3D printing, and the outcome could have widespread implications for the design and availability of affordable 3D printers incorporating such features. While this specific case concerns US Patent 9,592,660, Stratasys's broader enforcement efforts against Bambu Lab also involve other core 3D printing technologies like purge towers and force detection systems. This dispute underscores the challenges and tensions inherent in intellectual property protection as new players enter and innovate within established technological landscapes.

The patent infringement litigation BambuLab USA, Inc. et al. v. Stratasys, Inc. (1:24-cv-01511 W.D. Tex.) concerns US Patent 9592660 and remains active.

Here are the key legal developments in chronological order:

• 2024-08-05: Stratasys allegedly put Bambu Lab on notice of patent infringement claims. This notice preceded the filing of both Stratasys's infringement suits and BambuLab's declaratory judgment action.
• 2024-12-09: BambuLab USA, Inc. and other related entities (BambuLab Limited, Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., Tuozhu Technology Limited) filed this declaratory judgment action against Stratasys, Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas, Austin Division. This action was initiated in part to address Stratasys's prior patent infringement lawsuits filed in the Eastern District of Texas against foreign Bambu Lab entities, which BambuLab USA asserted deliberately omitted it as a defendant despite being responsible for U.S. sales of the accused products. The Eastern District of Texas suits (e.g., Stratasys, Inc. v. Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co. Ltd. et al., Case No. 2:24-cv-00645) allege infringement of multiple patents, including US 9592660, by Bambu Lab's 3D printers.
• Late 2024 / Early 2025: Stratasys, Inc. filed its Answer to the declaratory judgment complaint, including a demand for a jury trial and asserting counterclaims against BambuLab Limited, BambuLab USA, Inc., Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd., Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., and Tuozhu Technology Limited.
• Early 2025: The BambuLab entities (Tuozhu Technology Limited, BambuLab Limited, BambuLab USA, Inc., Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd.) subsequently filed an Answer to Stratasys's counterclaims and asserted their own counterclaims against Stratasys, Inc.
• 2025-01-14: Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd., with BambuLab Limited, Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd., Tuozhu Technology Limited, and BambuLab USA, Inc. identified as potential real parties-in-interest, filed an Inter Partes Review (IPR2025-00257) with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging claims of US Patent 9592660.
• 2025-03-27: The district court case was reassigned from Judge Robert Pitman to Judge Alan D Albright for all proceedings.
• 2025-06-06: The PTAB instituted IPR2025-00257, agreeing to review claims 1, 3-11, and 17-22 of US Patent 9592660. At the time of institution, the PTAB noted that the district court had not issued a stay in the parallel litigation.
• 2025-06-12: Another related IPR, IPR2025-00354 (Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co Ltd v. Stratasys Inc), which challenges related patents, also saw institution. Other related IPRs challenging patents asserted by Stratasys include IPR2025-00311 and IPR2025-00321.
• 2025-12-03: A Markman (claim construction) hearing is scheduled in the district court for the construction of patent claims.
• 2026 (Expected): Fact and expert discovery are expected to close in 2026.
• Mid-2026 (Expected): The district court case is currently anticipated to proceed to trial around late May or early June 2026. The PTAB's final written decision for IPR2025-00257 is also expected by mid-June 2026.

The case is ongoing and has not yet reached a final disposition.

BambuLab USA, Inc. is represented by attorneys from Fish & Richardson P.C. in this declaratory judgment action.

The following attorneys are identified as counsel for the plaintiff(s):

• L. Brian Wood (Principal)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Austin office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Wood is a principal at Fish & Richardson and frequently represents clients in patent litigation across various technologies, including in the Western District of Texas.

• Jonathan E. Singer (Principal)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Austin office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Singer is a principal at Fish & Richardson with extensive experience in patent litigation, including complex technology disputes.

• Neil J. McNabnay (Principal)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Dallas office
  • Experience Note: Mr. McNabnay is a principal at Fish & Richardson and a seasoned patent litigator, often involved in cases in Texas federal courts.

These attorneys have appeared on behalf of BambuLab USA, Inc., and related entities such as Shenzhen Tuozhu Technology Co., Ltd. and Shanghai Lunkuo Technology Co., Ltd. in filings related to this case or related litigation. Specific roles (e.g., lead counsel, local counsel) are typically determined as the case progresses, but all listed attorneys are principals at their firm, indicating a significant role in the litigation.

Stratasys, Inc. is represented by attorneys from McDermott Will & Emery LLP and Robins Kaplan LLP.

The following attorneys are identified as counsel for the defendant(s):

• Kevin J. Meek (Lead Counsel)

  • Firm: McDermott Will & Emery LLP
  • Experience Note: Mr. Meek is associated with McDermott Will & Emery LLP, which is involved in various patent litigation cases.

• Andrea L. Fair (Counsel)

  • Firm: McDermott Will & Emery LLP
  • Experience Note: Ms. Fair is also listed as counsel for Stratasys, Inc. with McDermott Will & Emery LLP.

• Joshua A. Griswold (Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Griswold is involved in patent matters and is listed as counsel for Stratasys, Inc. in related PTAB proceedings, indicating patent litigation experience. (Note: While Fish & Richardson is listed as plaintiff's counsel in the district court action, Mr. Griswold appears to represent Stratasys in related PTAB proceedings, suggesting a potential conflict or a different representation scope. This should be cross-referenced with district court filings to confirm his role in the current case.)

• Patrick J. Bisenius (Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Bisenius is listed as counsel for Stratasys, Inc. in related PTAB proceedings. (Note: Similar to Mr. Griswold, his representation of Stratasys in PTAB for IPR2025-00311, while Fish & Richardson represents BambuLab in the district court, suggests a potential conflict or limited scope of representation. Further review of district court filings is needed to clarify his role in the 1:24-cv-01511 case.)

• Cameron A. Ubel (Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Ubel is listed as counsel for Stratasys, Inc. in related PTAB proceedings. (Note: As with the other Fish & Richardson attorneys listed for Stratasys in PTAB, his role in the district court case 1:24-cv-01511 requires further confirmation due to the firm's representation of BambuLab in that action.)

• Michael T. Hawkins (Counsel)

  • Firm: Fish & Richardson P.C., Minneapolis office
  • Experience Note: Mr. Hawkins is listed as counsel for Stratasys, Inc. in related PTAB proceedings. (Note: His appearance for Stratasys in PTAB while Fish & Richardson represents BambuLab in the district court case warrants clarification regarding his involvement in 1:24-cv-01511.)

It's important to note that the PacerMonitor entry for 1:24-cv-01511 also lists several attorneys from Fish & Richardson for BambuLab USA, Inc.. The appearance of Fish & Richardson attorneys representing Stratasys in related PTAB proceedings (IPR2025-00311) for the same patent at issue (9592660) indicates a nuanced representation strategy, possibly with different teams handling different venues or a specific, limited scope of representation in the PTAB actions. Further docket review of the district court case (1:24-cv-01511) would be necessary to confirm the full counsel team for Stratasys in that specific action and to clarify the roles of the Fish & Richardson attorneys. Stratasys has previously used Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP in other patent infringement claims related to 3D printing technology. Robins Kaplan LLP also has a recognized patent litigation group with extensive experience.