Source reporting: Texas Gun Rights
The U.S. Department of Justice has told a federal court in Texas that injunctions in private patent cases could support the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives’ interest in limiting forced reset trigger sales and distribution, according to Texas Gun Rights.
The August 31 statement of interest was filed on the ATF’s behalf in consolidated Rare Breed Triggers patent litigation pending in the Eastern District of Texas. Rare Breed Triggers and ABC IP are seeking preliminary injunctions against third parties they accuse of patent infringement.
Texas Gun Rights reports that DOJ asked the court to weigh the public-interest portion of the injunction analysis heavily in favor of the plaintiffs. The filing argues that successful patent-enforcement actions restricting third-party forced reset trigger activity could further the ATF’s stated public-safety interest.
The federal government’s position is narrower than a request to decide the regulatory classification of the devices. According to the source article, DOJ did not ask the court to classify forced reset triggers as machineguns. It also did not take a position on the other legal requirements for preliminary relief or on whether the court should ultimately issue any injunction. Questions about infringement, patent validity and enforceability remain for the litigation process.
The filing follows a similar federal statement submitted in January and refers to Rare Breed’s 2025 settlement with the government. That settlement came after prior litigation over the ATF’s effort to regulate certain forced reset triggers as machineguns. Texas Gun Rights says a federal court in North Texas rejected that classification for the devices before it in 2024, after which the broader dispute was settled.
Texas Gun Rights characterizes the new filing as an attempt to use private patent litigation to advance federal firearms restrictions and argues that the ATF should be abolished. Those are the organization’s advocacy conclusions, not findings made by the Eastern District of Texas.
The filing is significant to Texas gun owners and public accountability because it places the federal agency’s policy interest before a Texas court in a private commercial dispute. The court must still apply patent and injunction law to the evidence presented. Any eventual order should make clear whether relief rests on established intellectual-property rights, the government’s asserted public interest, or both.