Tricam Industries LLC v. Little Giant Ladder Systems LLC

Competitive Ladder Manufacturers Escalate Rivalry with PTAB Challenge

In a new chapter of an ongoing rivalry, ladder manufacturer Tricam Industries, LLC has filed a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition seeking to invalidate a recently issued patent owned by its direct competitor, Little Giant Ladder Systems, LLC. Both are significant operating companies in the North American market for ladders and other home improvement equipment. Minnesota-based Tricam is known for its Gorilla Ladders® brand, while Utah-based Little Giant is a major manufacturer of various ladder systems. This new administrative challenge at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) follows years of hard-fought district court litigation between the two companies, signaling a continuing battle over ladder innovation and market share.

The current dispute, filed on April 14, 2026, centers on Little Giant's U.S. Patent No. 12,359,506. While the specific text of the patent and the petition for review are not yet widely available in public records, the patent is associated with Little Giant's "A-Force" line of fiberglass A-frame stepladders. The specific Tricam product that prompted the challenge is not publicly known at this time. The case's procedural posture as a PGR is significant; this PTAB proceeding allows a petitioner to challenge a patent's validity on broader grounds than an Inter Partes Review (IPR), including issues like lack of enablement or indefiniteness, but must be filed within nine months of the patent's grant. This venue is often seen as a faster and potentially more cost-effective way to resolve validity disputes compared to federal court.

This case is notable as it represents a strategic maneuver in the long-running competition between two market leaders. The filing comes on the heels of a significant victory for Tricam, where the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a summary judgment of non-infringement in a separate case involving Little Giant's U.S. Patent No. 10,767,416 and Tricam's Gorilla Ladder MPX products. Having successfully defended against infringement claims in district court, Tricam is now taking an offensive posture by proactively challenging a new Little Giant patent at the PTAB. The outcome of this PGR could have a substantial impact on the competitive landscape for A-frame and specialty ladders.

Key Legal Developments in PGR2026-00043

As of May 1, 2026, the Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding Tricam Industries LLC v. Little Giant Ladder Systems LLC, PGR2026-00043, is in its earliest stages. Key developments are centered on the initial filing and the procedural deadlines that follow.

Chronological Developments:

• 2026-04-14: Petition for Post-Grant Review Filed
  Tricam Industries, LLC filed a petition with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to institute a Post-Grant Review of U.S. Patent No. 12,359,506, owned by Little Giant Ladder Systems, LLC. The patent is listed on Little Giant's website as being associated with its "AFORCE" line of ladders. The petition was filed well within the nine-month statutory window for PGR eligibility, which allows challenges on a wider range of validity grounds than the more common Inter Partes Review (IPR).

• Current Status: Pending Patent Owner Preliminary Response
  The case is currently pending before the PTAB. Following the filing of the petition, the next step in the process is for the patent owner, Little Giant, to file an optional Patent Owner Preliminary Response (POPR). In this document, Little Giant can argue why the PTAB should deny institution of the review. The deadline for this response is three months from the date the PTAB issues a "Notice of Filing Date Accorded." While the specific date of this notice for PGR2026-00043 is not yet available in public records, PTAB policy aims to issue such notices within 14 days of the petition filing. Therefore, Little Giant's preliminary response is anticipated to be due in or around July 2026.

• Next Milestone: Institution Decision
  After the deadline for the POPR passes, the PTAB will have three months to decide whether to institute the trial. This decision, expected in the fall of 2026, will determine whether Tricam has established a sufficient likelihood of prevailing on at least one of the challenged claims. If instituted, the proceeding will move forward with a full trial on the merits before the Board.

Parallel Proceedings and Litigation Context

This PGR is the latest action in a long-running and contentious legal battle between the two ladder industry competitors. Notably, there is no concurrent district court litigation involving the '506 patent at this time, making this PTAB challenge a preemptive strike by Tricam.

This offensive strategy follows a major defensive victory for Tricam. On February 5, 2026, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a summary judgment of non-infringement in favor of Tricam in a case brought by Little Giant on a different patent, U.S. Patent No. 10,767,416. That case, which involved Tricam's Gorilla Ladder MPX products, turned on the court's construction of a key claim term, after which the court found no infringement either literally or under the doctrine of equivalents. Having successfully fended off infringement claims on one Little Giant patent, Tricam is now proactively challenging the validity of a newly issued one.

Counsel for Petitioner Tricam Industries LLC

As the Post-Grant Review (PGR) was recently filed, the primary documents available on the public record are the petition and associated filings. These documents identify the legal team representing the petitioner, Tricam Industries LLC.

Based on the petition for PGR filed on April 14, 2026, the counsel of record for Tricam are from the intellectual property firm Alston & Bird LLP.

• Name: Kirk T. Bradley

  • Role: Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP (Atlanta, GA office)
  • Note on Experience: Mr. Bradley has extensive experience representing clients in patent litigation before federal district courts, the ITC, and the PTAB, including numerous IPR and PGR proceedings.

• Name: Scott A.M. Chambers

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP (Washington, D.C. office)
  • Note on Experience: Mr. Chambers is a seasoned PTAB practitioner, having handled dozens of post-grant proceedings for both petitioners and patent owners across various technology sectors.

• Name: Jessica L. Eagan

  • Role: Of Counsel
  • Firm: Alston & Bird LLP (Atlanta, GA office)
  • Note on Experience: Her practice focuses on intellectual property litigation, with a particular emphasis on patent disputes and post-grant proceedings before the PTAB.

Counsel for Patent Owner Little Giant Ladder Systems LLC

As of May 5, 2026, the Post-Grant Review (PGR) is in its initial phase, and counsel for the patent owner, Little Giant Ladder Systems, LLC, has not yet filed a formal notice of appearance in the public record for PGR2026-00043. The deadline for Little Giant to file an optional Patent Owner Preliminary Response (POPR), which would identify its legal representatives, is approximately three months from the petition's filing date, suggesting an appearance will be made by July 2026.

However, based on their long-standing litigation history with Tricam Industries, Little Giant has consistently relied on counsel from the law firm Dorsey & Whitney LLP. This firm represented Little Giant in the recent federal court litigation and subsequent appeal involving a different ladder patent, Little Giant Ladder Systems, LLC v. Tricam Industries, Inc. (Case No. 0:20-cv-02497, D. Minn. and Case No. 24-2115, Fed. Cir.). It is highly probable that the same team will represent Little Giant in this PTAB matter.

The anticipated counsel for Little Giant are:

• Name: Mark A. Miller

  • Role: Likely Lead Counsel
  • Firm: Dorsey & Whitney LLP (Salt Lake City, UT office)
  • Note on Experience: Mr. Miller argued the recent appeal for Little Giant before the Federal Circuit and has a practice focused on patent and trademark litigation.

• Name: Brett L. Foster

  • Role: Likely Of Counsel
  • Firm: Dorsey & Whitney LLP (Salt Lake City, UT office)
  • Note on Experience: Represented Little Giant in the recent Federal Circuit appeal alongside Mark Miller.

• Name: Elliot Hales

  • Role: Likely Of Counsel
  • Firm: Dorsey & Whitney LLP (Salt Lake City, UT office)
  • Note on Experience: Also represented Little Giant in the prior district court and appellate litigation against Tricam.

• Name: Shannon L. Bjorklund

  • Role: Likely Of Counsel
  • Firm: Dorsey & Whitney LLP (Minneapolis, MN office)
  • Note on Experience: Served as counsel for Little Giant in the District of Minnesota litigation against Tricam.