ABC IP, LLC et al. v. TGR Services, LLC et al
Case Overview
- Case Name: ABC IP, LLC et al. v. TGR Services, LLC et al.
- Court: U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Sherman Division)
- Case Number: 4:26-cv-00680
- Filing Date: June 18, 2026
- Plaintiffs: ABC IP, LLC and Rare Breed Triggers, Inc.
- Defendants: TGR Services, LLC (d/b/a Mission Ridge LLC & Mission Ridge Range & Academy LLC, f/k/a Texas Gun Range Operators LLC) and TGR Ventures, LP
- Nature of Action: Civil lawsuit alleging willful patent infringement with a demand for a jury trial.
Executive Summary
Plaintiffs ABC IP, LLC (the patent owner) and Rare Breed Triggers, Inc. (the exclusive licensee) have filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Texas-based shooting range and firearms retail operators TGR Services, LLC and TGR Ventures, LP. The federal complaint alleges that the Defendants are actively marketing, advertising, and selling unauthorized mechanical parts and trigger assemblies at their retail locations and digital storefronts. The accused inventory specifically includes the Atrius Development Group Forced Reset Selector configurations and the Partisan Triggers Disruptor Drop-In Trigger.
Plaintiffs contend that these products directly infringe upon their expansive intellectual property portfolio protecting “forced reset trigger” (FRT) firearm innovations. Because the Defendants reportedly continued marketing and selling these systems despite clear notice of the relevant legal protections—including a previous federal enforcement action involving the same parts—the Plaintiffs are accusing them of willful infringement, opening the door for enhanced damages.
The Technology in Dispute
The lawsuit centers on advanced firearm trigger engineering—specifically the mechanical transition from standard semi-automatic mechanisms to patented forced reset trigger (FRT) assemblies:
- Standard Semi-Automatic Trigger: Relies on a traditional disconnector mechanism. When a round is fired, the user must manually release rearward finger pressure on the trigger so the disconnector can hand the hammer back off to the main trigger sear before the firearm can be discharged again.
- Forced Reset Mechanism (The Patented Invention): Eliminates the necessity of traditional disconnector dependency during accelerated sequences. Instead, it utilizes specialized locking bars, cams, or lever systems cycled directly by the firearm’s reciprocating bolt carrier. This mechanically forces the trigger forward into its set 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 – VIII)
The complaint asserts that the product configurations marketed by the Defendants (sold via missionridgerange.com) infringe upon eight distinct U.S. Patents owned by ABC IP, LLC:
| Count | Asserted Patent | Technical / Mechanical Focus of Claim | Accused Device Context |
| Count I | U.S. Patent No. 12,038,247 | Overarching dual-mode trigger utilizing a moving cam lobe to physically force the trigger member back into its set position. | Atrius Selector |
| Count II | U.S. Patent No. 12,031,784 | Extended trigger locking device featuring an upwardly extending deflectable lever arm actuated by direct contact with the cycling bolt carrier. | Atrius Selector |
| Count III | U.S. Patent No. 12,578,159 | Novel firearm mechanism for accelerating firing sequences utilizing multi-mode operations and specific internal sear surface geometries. | Atrius Selector |
| Count IV | U.S. Patent No. 10,514,223 | Drop-in trigger housing framework containing a hammer-actuated reset and an internal spring-biased locking bar system. | Partisan Disruptor |
| Count V | U.S. Patent No. 11,724,003 | Multi-mode selection assembly enabling user switching between standard disconnector operations and locked forced-reset functions. | Partisan Disruptor |
| Count VI | U.S. Patent No. 12,036,336 | Specialized multi-position safety selector mechanics that physically reposition internal disconnector components out of engagement paths. | Partisan Disruptor |
| Count VII | U.S. Patent No. 12,274,807 | Internal receiver box configuration optimizing safety selector cam faces to toggle between standard and forced-reset capabilities. | Partisan Disruptor |
| Count VIII | U.S. Patent No. 12,636,403 | Structural claim focusing on the physical interaction profiles between hammer hooks, trigger members, and safety selectors. | Atrius Selector & Partisan Disruptor |
Indirect, Contributory, and Willful Infringement
- Inducing Infringement: The suit highlights that the Defendants take active steps to encourage, market, and provide setup guides for customers on how to install and cycle the components alongside full-auto rated bolt carrier groups to ensure system reliability.
- Contributory Infringement: Asserts that separate components distributed by the Defendants—such as standalone cams or isolated lever arms—are specially designed for infringing fire control units and hold no substantial, non-infringing purpose.
- Prior Legal Notice of Willful Conduct: The filing documents a prior federal lawsuit filed against these exact Defendants on March 13, 2026, over the same component catalog. Though that case was voluntarily dismissed on June 17, 2026, the ongoing retail distribution of the systems establishes documented, explicit notice of the property rights, proving willful behavior.
Remedy & Relief Sought
The Plaintiffs claim severe, ongoing economic and operational harm due to these unauthorized retail operations. They are requesting that the federal court grant the following relief:
- Injunctions: Both preliminary and permanent injunctions to immediately halt TGR Services, TGR Ventures, and their agents from importing, advertising, or selling the Atrius selectors, Disruptor trigger units, or related forced-reset components.
- Damages: Full financial compensation for lost retail profits or reasonable royalties resulting from patent infringement, alongside pre- and post-judgment interest.
- Punitive Multipliers: Asking the court to treble (triple) the final calculated damages under 35 U.S.C. § 284 due to the “egregious and willful” nature of the patent infringement.
- Legal Fees: A declaration that this constitutes an “exceptional case” under federal law (35 U.S.C. § 285), requiring the Defendants to pay all of the Plaintiffs’ attorneys’ fees, costs, and associated legal expenses.
