Axcess Global Sciences LLC v. Oyanxi Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Axcess Global Sciences LLC (Utah)
  • Defendant: Oyanxi, Inc., dba TOTARIA (Colorado)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Workman Nydegger
• Case Identification: 1:26-cv-00674, D. Colo., 02/19/2026
• Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Colorado because the Defendant is a Colorado corporation that resides in the district.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s "Keto ACV Gummies" supplement infringes a patent related to mixed salt beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) compositions designed to induce ketosis while maintaining electrolyte balance.
• Technical Context: The technology is situated in the nutritional supplements market, specifically targeting consumers of ketogenic diets who use exogenous ketones to initiate or sustain a state of ketosis.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that the Plaintiff provided the Defendant with actual notice of infringement of the asserted patent prior to filing the lawsuit, a fact that may be relevant to future claims for willful infringement.

Case Timeline

Date	Event
2016-03-11	U.S. Patent No. 10,292,952 Priority Date
2019-05-21	U.S. Patent No. 10,292,952 Issued
2026-02-19	Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 10,292,952 - "Mixed Salt Compositions for Maintaining or Restoring Electrolyte Balance while Producing Elevated and Sustained Ketosis"

• Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 10,292,952, "Mixed Salt Compositions for Maintaining or Restoring Electrolyte Balance while Producing Elevated and Sustained Ketosis," issued May 21, 2019 (the “’952 Patent”).

The Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent describes the difficulty of transitioning into and maintaining a state of nutritional ketosis, which is often accompanied by uncomfortable side effects (the "low-carb flu") and electrolyte imbalances resulting from the diuretic effects of a low-carbohydrate diet (’952 Patent, col. 3:13-40). Administering single-cation ketone salts can exacerbate these imbalances, such as by providing an excessive amount of sodium (’952 Patent, col. 5:58-68).
• The Patented Solution: The invention is a composition of beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB), an exogenous ketone, formulated as a "mixed salt" containing multiple different cations (e.g., sodium, potassium, calcium, magnesium) (’952 Patent, abstract). This approach is designed to deliver BHB to induce ketosis while simultaneously providing a "biologically balanced set of cationic electrolytes," thereby avoiding the detrimental health effects associated with consuming too much of a single electrolyte (’952 Patent, col. 3:59-62; ’952 Patent, col. 5:27-31).
• Technical Importance: The claimed solution aims to make ketogenic diets more tolerable and sustainable for a broader population by mitigating the common physiological challenges associated with entering ketosis.

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 19 (Compl. ¶17).
• The essential elements of independent claim 19 include:
  • A composition comprising a beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) mixed salt formulated from multiple different cations and a single anion (BHB), where other anions are omitted from the mixed salt.
  • The cations are formulated to provide a biologically balanced set of electrolytes.
  • The BHB mixed salt comprises at least three salts selected from a group consisting of sodium BHB, potassium BHB, calcium BHB, and magnesium BHB.
  • Each of the selected salts must be present in a concentration of 10-70% by weight of the mixed salt.
  • The BHB mixed salt is in solid and/or powder form.
• The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims, but states the provided analysis is a "non-limiting example" (Compl. ¶17).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The accused product is a nutritional supplement named "Keto ACV Gummies," sold by the Defendant under the brand name Totaria (Compl. ¶7).

Functionality and Market Context

• The accused product is a gummy supplement marketed for "Keto Support," among other health benefits (Compl. p. 6). A "Supplement Facts" label provided in the complaint identifies the inclusion of "BHB Sodium (β-hydroxybutyric acid)," "BHB Magnesium (β-hydroxybutyric acid)," and "BHB Calcium (β-hydroxybutyric acid)" as ingredients (Compl. p. 3). The complaint includes a photograph of the product packaging, which depicts the Keto ACV Gummies bottle (Compl. p. 3).
• The complaint alleges the product is sold through the Defendant's own website as well as third-party online retailers, including Amazon and Walmart, placing it in direct competition with the Plaintiff's products (Compl. ¶10; Compl. ¶12).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

’952 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 19)	Alleged Infringing Functionality	Complaint Citation	Patent Citation
a beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt formulated from a plurality of different cations and a single anion, wherein the single anion is beta-hydroxybutyrate, and wherein other anions are omitted from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt...	The accused product is a composition containing BHB Sodium, BHB Magnesium, and BHB Calcium, which together allegedly form a mixed salt with BHB as the single anion. The complaint points to the "Supplement Facts" label as evidence. This label identifies the presence of BHB Sodium, Magnesium, and Calcium (Compl. p. 8).	¶21	col. 15:3-8
the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt comprising at least three salts selected from the group consisting of: 10-70% by weight of sodium beta-hydroxybutyrate; 10-70% by weight of potassium beta-hydroxybutyrate; 10-70% by weight of calcium beta-hydroxybutyrate; and 10-70% by weight of magnesium beta-hydroxybutyrate,	The accused product's "Supplement Facts" label lists three salts from the claimed group: BHB Sodium (20mg), BHB Magnesium (35mg), and BHB Calcium (65mg). The complaint alleges these ingredients meet the "at least three salts" limitation (Compl. p. 8). The complaint does not provide calculations to demonstrate that these amounts fall within the required 10-70% by weight ranges for the total BHB mixed salt.	¶22	col. 16:11-18
wherein the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt is in solid and/or powder form.	The complaint alleges that the accused product is sold as a "solid gummy form," which it contends meets this limitation (Compl. ¶24).	¶24	col. 16:19-20

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Quantitative Scope: A primary factual question will be whether the accused product's formulation meets the quantitative limitation requiring "10-70% by weight" for each of the three identified BHB salts relative to the total "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt." The complaint provides absolute amounts per serving (20mg, 35mg, 65mg) but does not provide the analysis to show these amounts satisfy the claimed weight percentages, which will likely require discovery and expert analysis.
  • Definitional Scope: The analysis may turn on the definition of "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt." The meaning of this term is critical for calculating the weight percentages. Further, the negative limitation "wherein other anions are omitted from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt" raises a question of scope. It is unclear if the presence of other anionic compounds in the final gummy formulation, such as the listed "Citric Acid" or "Sodium Citrate" (Compl. p. 3), would place the product outside the scope of the claim.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt"

• Context and Importance: The definition of this term is foundational to the infringement analysis, as the "10-70% by weight" limitations for the constituent salts are calculated as a percentage of this "mixed salt." The parties may dispute which ingredients of the accused product constitute the "mixed salt."

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A defendant could argue that the "mixed salt" in the context of the final product includes binders, excipients, or other ingredients, which would alter the weight percentage calculations of the active BHB salts.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent specification uses the term "mixed salt" to refer specifically to the combination of BHB salts, distinct from other potential components of a final "ketogenic composition" (’952 Patent, col. 4:45-47). The patentee may argue the term refers only to the aggregate of the BHB-cation compounds.

• The Term: "wherein other anions are omitted from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt"

• Context and Importance: This negative limitation is a potential point of non-infringement. Practitioners may focus on this term because the accused product's "Other Ingredients" list includes "Citric Acid" and "Sodium Citrate" (Compl. p. 3), which contain the citrate anion. The dispute will be whether these ingredients are considered part of the "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt."

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation (Favoring Infringement): The patentee may argue that "from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt" means that the BHB salts themselves cannot be, for example, BHB-chloride or BHB-sulfate. Under this reading, the presence of other anionic compounds as separate excipients in the final composition would not negate this element.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation (Favoring Non-Infringement): The defendant may argue that if the final mixture containing the BHB salts also contains other anions, the "mixed salt" as a whole no longer meets the "other anions are omitted" limitation, regardless of how those anions were introduced.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint makes a general allegation of induced infringement, stating Defendant induces its customers to infringe (Compl. ¶25). The complaint does not specify the acts constituting inducement, such as referencing user instructions or marketing materials.
• Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges that Defendant’s infringement is willful and deliberate (Compl. ¶26; Compl. ¶30). This allegation is based on Plaintiff having "provided actual notice to Defendant of its infringement of the '952 Patent prior to the filing of this lawsuit" (Compl. ¶16; Compl. ¶28).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

• A central issue will be one of quantitative evidence: Does a chemical analysis of the "Keto ACV Gummies" reveal that the constituent BHB salts (sodium, magnesium, and calcium) each comprise between 10% and 70% of the total weight of all BHB salts in the formulation? The complaint's infringement theory depends on this factual premise, which is not substantiated by the product's public-facing label alone.
• The case may also hinge on a question of claim scope and negative limitations: Can the claim term "wherein other anions are omitted from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt" be met if the final accused product contains other anionic ingredients, such as citrate, listed as excipients? The construction of this phrase will be critical in determining whether the presence of common food additives defeats the infringement allegation.