1. Trademark Law Firm New Jersey Newark Case Background and Initial Allegation
The client retained a trademark law firm New Jersey after receiving notice of a criminal complaint alleging unlawful use of patented manufacturing equipment.
The dispute stemmed from a deteriorated business relationship between two companies in the medical supply sector.
Manufacturing Equipment Dispute and Ownership Conflict
The client had previously worked as a senior production manager at a mask manufacturing company in New Jersey.
After leaving the company, he established an independent entity focused on developing improved production systems.
During a transitional period, he tested newly designed machinery using components that had originally been associated with his former employer.
The former company claimed that this conduct constituted unauthorized use of patented technology and reported the matter to law enforcement.
Federal Patent Law Framework
Patent infringement in the United States is governed primarily by 35 U.S.C. § 271.
Criminal liability is rare and generally requires willful conduct involving counterfeit goods under 18 U.S.C. § 2320.
A trademark law firm New Jersey must carefully distinguish between civil infringement disputes and conduct that could rise to criminal exposure.
In this case, the central question was whether the testing activity qualified as commercial exploitation of a patented invention.
2. Trademark Law Firm New Jersey Newark Legal Analysis of Alleged Infringement
The trademark law firm New Jersey conducted a detailed review of the patent claims, the accused equipment, and the scope of the client’s testing activity.
The legal evaluation focused on intent, commercial activity, and the technical differences between the patented device and the new prototype.
Technical Comparison and Absence of Claim Overlap
A patent infringement determination requires that the accused product meet every limitation of at least one patent claim.
The trademark law firm New Jersey retained a technical consultant to compare the former employer’s patent specifications with the client’s redesigned system.
The analysis demonstrated meaningful structural differences.
The redesigned machinery incorporated alternative materials and modified airflow mechanisms that were not described in the original patent claims.
Without literal infringement or doctrine of equivalents applicability, the criminal theory weakened significantly.
Non Commercial Testing and Lack of Willfulness
Criminal enforcement in intellectual property cases requires proof of willful misconduct.
The trademark law firm New Jersey emphasized that the testing phase did not involve market sales, commercial distribution, or revenue generation.
The prototype units were not introduced into commerce, and all sample products were discarded after evaluation.
The absence of commercial intent undermined any argument under 18 U.S.C. § 2320.
Law enforcement authorities ultimately recognized that the dispute more closely resembled a civil commercial disagreement rather than criminal counterfeiting.
3. Trademark Law Firm New Jersey Newark Defense Strategy during Investigation
The trademark law firm New Jersey focused on early engagement with investigators.
By presenting technical documentation and business communications promptly, the firm ensured that the investigative record accurately reflected the client’s conduct.
Evidence of Prior Consent and Business Context
The former employer had previously encouraged collaborative testing and equipment experimentation during ongoing business discussions.
The trademark law firm New Jersey submitted email correspondence and text communications demonstrating that equipment access had not been expressly prohibited.
This context weakened the complainant’s claim of intentional theft of proprietary technology.
Competitive Motive and Commercial Rivalry
The dispute arose shortly after the client began developing an independent production system that could compete in the same market.
The trademark law firm New Jersey argued that the complaint reflected commercial rivalry rather than actual criminal wrongdoing.
Investigators examined the broader business history and determined that the conflict centered on market competition, not unlawful trafficking in counterfeit goods.
4. Trademark Law Firm New Jersey Newark Investigation Outcome and Compliance Considerations
After reviewing the submitted materials, authorities declined to pursue prosecution.
The trademark law firm New Jersey successfully demonstrated that the conduct did not meet the statutory elements required for criminal enforcement.
Decision to Decline Charges
Law enforcement concluded that the evidence did not support willful infringement or commercial trafficking.
No indictment was issued, and the investigation was formally closed.
The trademark law firm New Jersey’s early intervention prevented escalation into federal prosecution.
Preventive Measures for Manufacturing Businesses
Companies operating in regulated manufacturing environments should implement clear documentation protocols when transitioning from prior employment relationships.
Independent equipment development should be supported by patent clearance analysis and written separation agreements.
A trademark law firm New Jersey can assist businesses in evaluating potential infringement exposure before disputes escalate into criminal allegations.
24 Feb, 2026
