Assignment history

Inventors

• Alfred Charles Griffin, III: Co-founder and CEO of Lightforce Orthodontics Inc. At the time of the original filing (April 25, 2018), he was leading the development of the company's core technology.
• Kelsey A. Fafara: An engineer at Lightforce Orthodontics Inc. at the time of filing.

Both inventors were directly employed by the original assignee, Lightforce Orthodontics Inc., and were integral to creating the product described in the patent. There are no indications of unusual departure patterns following the filing.

Original assignee

The original assignee is Lightforce Orthodontics Inc., a privately held medical device company based in Burlington, Massachusetts. The company's primary line of business is the design and manufacture of patient-specific, 3D-printed ceramic orthodontic brackets and related software platforms for orthodontists. Lightforce actively markets and sells the "LightForce" system, a product that directly embodies the claims of US patent 12,409,014. As of May 2026, the company is operational and continues to raise venture capital and debt financing.

Assignment timeline

• 2024-05-28 (executed) / recorded 2024-05-29 — Reel 066316/0632

  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: Alfred Charles Griffin, III; Kelsey A. Fafara
  • Assignee: Lightforce Orthodontics, Inc.
  • Correspondent: Lando & Anastasi, LLP, 60 State Street, 23rd Floor, Boston, MA 02109
  • Context: Routine pre-issuance assignment of interest from the inventors to their employer.

• 2024-08-09 (executed) / recorded 2024-08-14 — Reel 067005/0112

  • Conveyance: Security Interest
  • Assignor: LightForce Orthodontics Inc.
  • Assignee: Trinity Capital Inc.
  • Correspondent: Perkins Coie LLP, 1201 Third Avenue, Suite 4900, Seattle, WA 98101
  • Context: Securitization of intellectual property as collateral for debt financing provided by Trinity Capital Inc., a venture debt firm.

Source: USPTO Patent Assignment Search for US 12,409,014

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 12409014
    2018 : Priority application filed by Lightforce
    2024 : Inventors assign to Lightforce Orthodontics
         : Security interest granted to Trinity Capital
    2025 : Patent issued

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. The original assignee, Lightforce Orthodontics, is an operating company that makes and sells products embodying the patent claims. The transfer to Trinity Capital Inc. (Reel 067005/0112) is a Security Interest, not an assignment of title to a shell LLC.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. Neither Lightforce Orthodontics Inc. nor Trinity Capital Inc. appear on public lists of high-frequency patent plaintiffs or NPEs maintained by RPX or Unified Patents. Trinity Capital is a well-known venture debt and equipment financing company.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Not present. The two recorded transfers were handled by different, unrelated law firms (Lando & Anastasi, LLP and Perkins Coie LLP).

4. Cascading transfers — Not present. There has been only one post-issuance transaction, which was a security agreement, not a change of title.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Not present. As of May 2026, no litigation has been filed involving this patent.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. Lightforce Orthodontics Inc. is an active, venture-backed operating company. The security agreement with Trinity Capital is evidence of ongoing financing, not bankruptcy.

7. Privateering — Not present. The patent remains controlled by the original innovator.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain does not involve any known defensive aggregators.

Verdict

Insufficient data

The patent is held by its original assignee, Lightforce Orthodontics Inc., an operating company that developed the technology and sells products embodying the claims. The only recorded post-issuance transaction is the granting of a security interest to Trinity Capital Inc. as collateral for financing (Reel 067005/0112), which is a common practice for venture-backed companies and not an indicator of assertion activity. As there is no history of litigation or transfer to a non-practicing entity, there is insufficient data to classify the patent as being asserted or held for NPE purposes.