Rare Breed Triggers Inc et al. v. Zach Morrow et al.

Case Background: Firearms Accessory Maker Continues Aggressive Patent Enforcement

In a legal battle centered on firearm trigger mechanisms, operating company Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. and its intellectual property holding company, ABC IP LLC, have filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Zach Morrow and his company, DNT LLC. The lawsuit, filed on April 14, 2026, accuses the defendants of infringing on two patents related to "forced reset trigger" (FRT) technology. These devices are designed to increase the effective rate of fire of a semi-automatic firearm by using the weapon's own cycling action to mechanically reset the trigger after each shot. This allows for faster follow-up shots as the shooter can maintain pressure on the trigger.

The accused products are a series of firearm component kits and parts sold by the defendants under the "Super Safety" brand. The plaintiffs allege these products, including the "D2 Complete FCG" and "DB9 Super Safety" kits, incorporate the patented technology without authorization. The patents at the heart of the dispute are U.S. Patent No. 12,038,247, which describes a "firearm trigger mechanism" with a selectable forced reset mode, and U.S. Patent No. 7,398,723, which details a "trigger forward displacement system and method." Essentially, both patents cover technology that uses the movement of the firearm's bolt carrier to force the trigger to reset.

The case is being heard in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX), a venue historically favored by patent plaintiffs for its fast trial dockets and reputation for plaintiff-friendly rulings. The case is assigned to Chief Judge Amos L. Mazzant, an experienced jurist in patent matters. This legal action is notable as it represents a continuation of Rare Breed's aggressive, industry-wide patent enforcement strategy. The company has filed numerous similar lawsuits against competitors in the growing FRT market. The backdrop to this litigation is a significant legal and regulatory controversy over whether FRTs classify as illegal machineguns under federal law, a battle Rare Breed has fought directly with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF). A May 2025 settlement between the Department of Justice and Rare Breed Triggers resolved this dispute, with one condition being that Rare Breed would actively enforce its patents.

Key Legal Developments and Outcome

As of May 3, 2026, the patent infringement litigation involving Rare Breed Triggers and DNT LLC is in the early stages of consolidated multidistrict litigation (MDL) proceedings in the Eastern District of Texas. The case has been marked by a transfer from its original venue and its inclusion in a broader legal battle over forced reset trigger (FRT) patents.

Pre-MDL History in the District of Idaho (2025-2026)

• 2025-06-06: Plaintiffs Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. and ABC IP LLC filed the initial patent infringement complaint against Zach Morrow and DNT LLC in the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho, docketed as Case No. 4:25-cv-00298.
• 2025-10-17: Plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint.
• 2025-11-21: Defendants Zach Morrow and DNT LLC filed their Amended Answer to the Third Amended Complaint, which included counterclaims against the plaintiffs.

Consolidation into Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) (2026)

• 2026-04-02: The U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a significant Transfer Order consolidating this case and five other similar lawsuits filed by Rare Breed into a single proceeding. The JPML created MDL No. 3176, officially captioned "In re: Rare Breed Triggers Patent Litigation." The panel rejected defendants' requests to limit the scope of the MDL to specific products or patents, opting for a broad consolidation to prevent duplicative discovery and inconsistent rulings.
• Transfer to the Eastern District of Texas: The JPML transferred the consolidated actions to the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, assigning them to Chief Judge Amos L. Mazzant for coordinated pretrial proceedings. The panel cited Rare Breed's status as a Texas-based company and the residence of two inventors in Texas as reasons for the venue selection.
• 2026-04-14: The case from the District of Idaho was officially transferred and opened in the Eastern District of Texas with the new case number 4:26-cv-00377. Pursuant to local rules, any motions that were pending in the Idaho court are considered moot and must be re-filed in the MDL to be considered.

Post-Transfer MDL Proceedings & Current Status

• Early Stages: Since its transfer in mid-April 2026, the case is in its nascent stage within the MDL. As of early May 2026, the docket for MDL No. 3176 primarily reflects the initial transfer orders and administrative filings. Judge Mazzant has not yet issued a comprehensive Case Management Order or a full scheduling order that would outline deadlines for key events like claim construction (Markman hearings) or discovery.
• Present Posture: The litigation is active and open. The immediate next steps will likely involve Judge Mazzant holding an initial case management conference to establish a leadership structure for the plaintiffs' and defendants' counsel, and to set a master schedule for discovery, motions, and claim construction proceedings for all consolidated cases.

Parallel PTAB Proceedings

A parallel validity challenge was launched at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) against one of the patents-in-suit in the broader MDL, though not filed by DNT LLC.

• U.S. Patent No. 12,038,247: On August 29, 2025, Atrius Development Group Corp., a defendant in a related action, filed a petition for inter partes review (IPR) against the '247 patent (IPR2025-01473). The petition challenged all claims (1-23) as obvious.
• 2026-02-18: Institution Denied: The PTAB issued a decision denying institution of the IPR. This was a favorable outcome for plaintiffs ABC IP and Rare Breed Triggers, as it prevents this specific PTAB challenge from proceeding and strengthens the '247 patent's presumption of validity in the district court litigation for the time being.

No parallel PTAB proceedings have been identified for the other patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 7,398,723. The denial of the IPR against the '247 patent means a stay of the MDL pending a PTAB review is unlikely on that basis.

Plaintiffs' Counsel of Record

Based on court filings and law firm publications, the following attorneys and firms have appeared on behalf of Plaintiffs Rare Breed Triggers Inc. and ABC IP LLC in this multidistrict patent litigation.

Potter Minton, P.C. (Local Counsel)

• Michael E. Jones (Role: Lead & Local Counsel):

  • Firm & Location: Potter Minton, P.C., in Tyler, Texas.
  • Notable Experience: A highly experienced trial lawyer and former U.S. Magistrate Judge in the Eastern District of Texas, Jones is frequently retained as local counsel in major East Texas patent cases due to his deep familiarity with the district's judges and practices.

• Allen F. Gardner (Role: Local Counsel):

  • Firm & Location: Potter Minton, P.C., in Tyler, Texas.
  • Notable Experience: Gardner is an intellectual property attorney with experience in patent, trademark, and copyright litigation within the Eastern District of Texas.

Gartnes & Roemaet, PLLC (Lead Counsel)

• Aaron M. Gartnes (Role: Lead Counsel):

  • Firm & Location: Gartnes & Roemaet, PLLC, in Houston, Texas.
  • Notable Experience: Gartnes has represented Rare Breed Triggers in its prior regulatory battles with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) and serves as lead counsel across the company's nationwide patent enforcement campaign.

• William J. Roemaet (Role: Of Counsel):

  • Firm & Location: Gartnes & Roemaet, PLLC, in Houston, Texas.
  • Notable Experience: Roemaet has significant experience in both commercial litigation and intellectual property matters, working alongside Gartnes on the broader Rare Breed litigation strategy.

• Travis J. Iams (Role: Counsel):

  • Firm & Location: Gartnes & Roemaet, PLLC, in Houston, Texas.
  • Notable Experience: Iams is a patent attorney whose practice focuses on intellectual property litigation and prosecution, and he has been actively involved in drafting key filings in the consolidated MDL proceedings.

• Austin L. Wood (Role: Counsel):

  • Firm & Location: Gartnes & Roemaet, PLLC, in Houston, Texas.
  • Notable Experience: Wood's practice includes commercial and intellectual property litigation, and he has appeared on numerous pleadings filed on behalf of Rare Breed Triggers across the related cases.

Initial appearances for the plaintiffs were formally entered in the consolidated MDL proceedings shortly after the case was transferred to the Eastern District of Texas. The legal team combines specialized patent litigation expertise with deep local knowledge of the court, a common and effective strategy in this venue.

Defendants' Counsel of Record

As of May 4, 2026, the following attorneys have appeared on behalf of defendants Zach Morrow and DNT LLC in this litigation, both in the original District of Idaho case and the subsequent consolidated MDL proceedings in the Eastern District of Texas.

• Name: Justin C. G. Allen

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Riverside Law LLP
  • Office Location: Wayne, Pennsylvania
  • Note: Allen has over 20 years of experience in intellectual property matters, focusing on patents, trademarks, and copyrights, and is admitted to practice before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

• Name: S. Calvin Smith

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Law Office of W. Calvin Smith, II, P.C.
  • Office Location: Atlanta, Georgia
  • Note: While the firm primarily handles personal injury and related matters, Smith is involved in this patent litigation as part of the defense team.

• Name: Scott D. Schneider

  • Role: Local Counsel (Eastern District of Texas)
  • Firm: Husch Blackwell LLP
  • Office Location: Austin, Texas
  • Note: Schneider is a Texas-based litigator with experience in complex federal court matters, serving as local counsel for the defendants in the MDL.

• Name: Joyce Ann Hemmer

  • Role: Counsel (in original Idaho action)
  • Firm: Morgan, Minnock, Rice & James, L.C.
  • Office Location: Boise, Idaho
  • Note: Hemmer represented the defendants in the original case filed in the District of Idaho, including filing the Amended Answer and Counterclaim on November 21, 2025. It is not yet clear from the MDL docket if she will continue as active counsel post-transfer.