An individual has brought suit against his former employer Atlantic Research Marketing Systems (West Bridgewater, MA) and another weapons manufacturer Samson Manuf. Corp. (Whately, MA) for patent infringement and a determination of patent priority pursuant to 35 U.S.C. §§ 146 and 291.
This case is the latest in a long running series of disputes over firearms , in particular a modular hand grip which attaches to firearms. Let’s step back a bit and review before we get into the details of this complaint.
The individual, Troy, used to work for ARMS but left to start a competing company. ARMS successfully sued Troy for trade secret misappropriation and infringement of one patent and added a another infringement action on a new patent (the one discussed below). At the same time Troy successfully sued Samson for trade secret misappropriation and breach of a confidentiality agreement claiming that Samson took the idea of its grip from Troy.
Somehow, the three entities Troy, Samson, and the owner of ARMS, each ended up with their own patents related to the component. Samson and ARMS separately (but through the same lawyer) requested an interference with Troy’s patent. An interference was declared between Troy and Samson, but a request by Troy to add ARMS’ then patent application to the same interference was denied. Troy lost the interference and his claims were cancelled without the BPAI knowing of apparently damaging statements made by Samson during a request to vacate the trade secret judgment against it.
Here Troy is requesting the court overturn the BPAI’s decision under § 146 and grant priority to Troy over Samson since Samson allegedly took the idea of its grip from Troy. Troy also requests a determination of priority over ARMS with regard to that patent. The complaint also asserts patent infringement against Samson’s component, a claim that depends on the revival of Troy’s patent.
Troy v. Samson Manuf. Corp. and Atlantic Research Marketing Systems, Inc., 11-0384-PBS (D. Mass. Mar. 7, 2011)
Comments