ABC IP, LLC et al. v. Dogwood Armory LLC
- Case Overview: ABC IP, LLC et al. v. Dogwood Armory LLC, Jeremy Dale Beeson, and Alyssa Lea Beeson
- Court: U.S. District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina (Greensboro Division)
- Case Number: 1:26-cv-498
- Filing Date: May 28, 2026
- Plaintiffs: ABC IP, LLC, Rare Breed Triggers, Inc., & RBTM LLC
- Defendants: Dogwood Armory LLC, Jeremy Dale Beeson, & Alyssa Lea Beeson
- Nature of Action: Civil lawsuit alleging willful patent infringement, federal and common law trademark infringement, false designation of origin, and unfair competition with a demand for a jury trial.
Executive Summary
Plaintiffs ABC IP, LLC (the patent owner), Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. (the exclusive licensee), and RBTM LLC have filed a multi-count lawsuit against Dogwood Armory LLC, Jeremy Dale Beeson, and Alyssa Lea Beeson. The complaint alleges that the Defendants are actively manufacturing, marketing, advertising, and selling unauthorized products—specifically the Hoffman 4140 AR-15 “Super Safety” full kits, component kits, and related trigger modification jigs—that infringe upon the Plaintiffs’ intellectual property.
Plaintiffs contend that these products directly copy their patented “forced reset trigger” (FRT) innovations and safety mechanism designs engineered for semi-automatic firearms. Furthermore, the suit alleges that the Defendants are wrongfully trading on the massive market goodwill of the registered “FRT” trademark to mislead consumers. Because the Defendants are reportedly continuing sales despite clear knowledge of the patents and trademarks, the Plaintiffs are accusing them of willful infringement, opening the door for enhanced damages.
The Technology in Dispute
The lawsuit centers on firearm trigger engineering—specifically the transition from standard semi-automatic mechanisms to advanced forced reset trigger (FRT) mechanisms:
- Standard Semi-Automatic Trigger: Relies on a traditional disconnector. When a round is fired, the user must manually release pressure on the trigger so the disconnector can hand the hammer back off to the main trigger sear before firing again.
- Forced Reset Mechanism (The Patented Invention): Eliminates the traditional disconnector functionality. Instead, it utilizes a specialized cam and lever system cycled by the firearm’s bolt carrier. This mechanically forces the trigger forward into its reset position during the action cycle, allowing for an accelerated, highly efficient firing sequence without converting the firearm into an automatic weapon.
Breakdown of Infringement Claims
Patent Infringement (Counts I – V)
The complaint asserts that Dogwood Armory’s “Super Safety” products (sold via dogwoodarmory.com as partial kits, complete component kits, and specialized tools like the Super Safety Trigger Jig) infringe upon five distinct U.S. Patents:
- Count I: U.S. Patent No. 12,038,247 – Focuses on the overarching forced-reset firearm trigger mechanism utilizing a moving cam lobe to force the trigger member back into its set position.
- Count II: U.S. Patent No. 12,031,784 – Covers an extended trigger member locking device featuring an upward extension piece (lever arm) that uses direct contact with the cycling bolt carrier to precisely lock and unlock the trigger.
- Count III: U.S. Patent No. 12,529,538 – Pertains to the specialized safety selection mechanism. It protects a three-mode cam selector component that allows a user to physically switch a single firearm platform between regular semi-automatic mode, forced-reset mode, and traditional “safe” mode.
- Count IV: U.S. Patent No. 12,578,159 – Protects the exact mechanical geometry and interactions between the hammer sear, trigger sear surfaces, and the pivoting action of the forced-reset cam during cycling.
- Count V: U.S. Patent No. 12,636,403 – Covers the dual-mode safety selector configuration that allows a user to toggle between standard disconnector operations and forced-reset operations within a single receiver box.
Trademark & Unfair Competition Infringement (Counts VI – VIII)
- Count VI & VIII: Federal & Common Law Trademark Infringement – Highlights the unauthorized use of the “FRT” trademark. The Defendants are accused of marketing trigger items using Rare Breed’s exact branding to capitalize on its market success and widespread consumer recognition.
- Count VII: False Designation of Origin – Asserts that the Defendants’ marketing tactics are highly likely to deceive or confuse consumers into falsely believing that Dogwood Armory’s products originate from, are endorsed by, or are affiliated with Rare Breed Triggers.
Remedy & Relief Sought
ABC IP, Rare Breed Triggers, and RBTM claim severe, irreparable economic and reputational harm due to these unauthorized sales and deceptive marketing practices. They are asking the federal court for:
- Injunctions: Both preliminary and permanent injunctions to immediately halt Dogwood Armory and its owners from manufacturing, importing, advertising, or selling the Super Safety kits or any product bearing the FRT marks. They also request an order forcing the removal and destruction of all physical and digital infringing promotional materials.
- Damages & Disgorgement: Full financial compensation for lost profits or reasonable royalties resulting from patent infringement, alongside the disgorgement of all profits the Defendants pocketed from their trademark violations.
- Punitive Multipliers: Asking the court to treble (triple) the damages due to the “egregious and willful” nature of the patent and trademark infringement.
- Legal Fees: A declaration that this is an exceptional case, requiring the Defendants to pay all of the Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees, corrective advertising costs, and legal court expenses.
