Axcess Global Sciences LLC v. TCCW Inc

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

• Parties & Counsel:
  • Plaintiff: Axcess Global Sciences LLC (Utah)
  • Defendant: TCCW Inc. dba Migcopat (Colorado)
  • Plaintiff’s Counsel: Workman Nydegger
• Case Identification: 1:26-cv-00683, D. Colo., 02/19/2026
• Venue Allegations: Venue is based on Defendant being a Colorado corporation with a principal place of business and a registered agent in the District of Colorado.
• Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s ketogenic supplement gummies infringe a patent related to mixed beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) salt compositions designed to induce ketosis while maintaining electrolyte balance.
• Technical Context: The technology addresses the market for exogenous ketone supplements, which aim to make the physiological state of ketosis easier for consumers to achieve and sustain for health and wellness purposes.
• Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges that Plaintiff provided Defendant with actual notice of infringement prior to filing the lawsuit, which may form the basis for a subsequent claim of 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 Invention Explained

• Problem Addressed: The patent background describes that transitioning into and maintaining a state of nutritional ketosis can be difficult and is often accompanied by adverse physiological effects, such as fatigue and dizziness, commonly referred to as the "low-carb flu" (’952 Patent, col. 2:13-18). These symptoms are often caused or exacerbated by electrolyte imbalances resulting from the diuretic effects of ketosis (’952 Patent, col. 2:36-40). Supplementing with exogenous ketones in the form of single-cation salts can worsen these imbalances by delivering an excessive amount of one particular electrolyte, such as sodium or calcium (’952 Patent, col. 5:46-64).
• The Patented Solution: The invention provides a composition of beta-hydroxybutyrate (BHB) formulated as a "mixed salt" containing multiple different cations, such as sodium, potassium, calcium, and magnesium (’952 Patent, abstract). This approach is designed to deliver exogenous ketones to induce or sustain ketosis while simultaneously providing a "biologically balanced set of cationic electrolytes" (’952 Patent, col. 6:29-30). The goal is to mitigate the electrolyte disruption associated with ketosis, making the process more tolerable for the user (’952 Patent, col. 6:31-35).
• Technical Importance: By addressing the common side effects of electrolyte imbalance, the technology aimed to improve the safety and sustainability of ketogenic lifestyles, potentially broadening their adoption in the health and wellness market (’952 Patent, col. 2:51-55).

Key Claims at a Glance

• The complaint asserts independent claim 19 (Compl. ¶18).
• The essential elements of claim 19 are:
  • A composition for maintaining or restoring electrolyte balance while promoting or sustaining ketosis.
  • The composition comprises a "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt" formulated from a plurality of different cations and a single beta-hydroxybutyrate anion, with other anions omitted from the salt.
  • The cations are formulated to provide a "biologically balanced set of cationic electrolytes."
  • The mixed salt comprises at least three salts selected from a group consisting of sodium BHB, potassium BHB, calcium BHB, and magnesium BHB, with each present in a concentration of 10-70% by weight.
  • The mixed salt is in a "solid and/or powder form."
• The complaint presents its analysis as a "non-limiting example," reserving the right to assert other claims (Compl. ¶17).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

• The "Keto ACV & Collagen Gummies" supplement sold under the Migcopat brand (Compl. ¶7).

Functionality and Market Context

• The Accused Product is a dietary supplement in a solid gummy form (Compl. ¶23). It is marketed for purposes including "Keto-Friendly Energy and Fat Utilization Support" (Compl. p. 6). The complaint alleges the product is sold through Defendant's website and third-party online retailers (Compl. ¶10). The product's "Supplement Facts" label, reproduced in the complaint, lists "BHB Sodium," "BHB Magnesium," and "BHB Calcium" as ingredients, each at 100mg per serving (Compl. ¶8).

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 cations being formulated so as to provide a biologically balanced set of cationic electrolytes upon administration to a mammal,	The Accused Product is alleged to contain a mixture of BHB Sodium, BHB Magnesium, and BHB Calcium, constituting a mixed salt with multiple cations (Na+, Mg2+, Ca2+) and a single anion (beta-hydroxybutyrate).	¶21	col. 4:45-49
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 product's "Supplement Facts" label lists BHB Sodium, BHB Magnesium, and BHB Calcium, which are three salts from the claimed group. The complaint provides an image of the Accused Product's 'Supplement Facts' label with a blue box highlighting these three ingredients (Compl. p. 8).	¶22	col. 6:40-44
wherein the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt is in solid and/or powder form.	The Accused Product is sold as a "solid gummy form." A marketing image in the complaint depicts the product as solid gummies (Compl. p. 9).	¶23	col. 4:5-7

• Identified Points of Contention:
  • Scope Questions: A primary dispute may arise over the proper construction of "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt." The claim requires that "other anions are omitted from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt." The Accused Product contains numerous other ingredients, including apple cider vinegar (acetic acid) and vitamins (ascorbic acid), which are associated with other anions (Compl. ¶8). The case may turn on whether these other ingredients are considered part of the "mixed salt," or if the "mixed salt" is narrowly defined as only the combination of BHB-based compounds.
  • Technical Questions: The infringement allegation for the weight percentage limitation (10-70%) appears to be based on the product label, which lists equal amounts (100mg) of three BHB salts (Compl. ¶8). This would place each component at 33.3% by weight of the total BHB salt mixture, falling within the claimed range. A key evidentiary question will be whether discovery and chemical analysis confirm these proportions in the final product and whether this calculation method aligns with the court's construction of "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt."
  • Scope Questions: Another potential point of contention is whether a "gummy" meets the "solid...form" limitation. The patent specification contrasts its preferred "solid or powder form" with a "liquid or gel form" (’952 Patent, col. 4:5-7). This raises the question of whether a gummy, which contains gelling agents, is properly classified as a "solid" or a "gel" in the context of the patent.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

• The Term: "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt"

• Context and Importance: The definition of this term is fundamental to the infringement analysis. It will determine which ingredients in the accused product are evaluated against the claim’s limitations regarding weight percentages and the omission of other anions. Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope dictates whether the analysis is confined to the three BHB ingredients or must include the dozens of other compounds in the gummy.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The patent uses the term in the context of an overall "ketogenic composition" (’952 Patent, col. 4:38-40), which could suggest the "mixed salt" refers to the entire active formulation within the final product.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim’s own language—"wherein other anions are omitted from the beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt"—strongly supports a narrow construction where the "mixed salt" is a specific chemical mixture consisting only of the BHB anion and the associated cations. The specification also distinguishes the "mixed BHB salt" from other potential components of a "ketogenic composition," such as vitamin D3 or medium chain fatty acids (’952 Patent, col. 7:5-8; ’952 Patent, col. 8:40-44), further suggesting it is a discrete entity.

• The Term: "solid...form"

• Context and Importance: The Accused Product is a gummy, and its classification as a "solid...form" is required for literal infringement. The patent appears to disfavor "gel form," making the distinction between a "solid" and a "gel" critical.

• Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

  • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A gummy is not a liquid or a powder, and in common parlance, it is a solid object. The claim's use of "solid and/or powder form" could be interpreted to encompass any non-liquid, non-gel state.
  • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification explicitly contrasts "solid or powder form" with "liquid or gel form" (’952 Patent, col. 4:5-7). Furthermore, the discussion of manufacturability focuses on issues relevant to powders, such as hygroscopicity and the use of anticaking agents (’952 Patent, col. 9:50-59; ’952 Patent, col. 10:10-20), which may imply that the inventors contemplated traditional solid forms like powders, capsules, and tablets, rather than a matrix-based form like a gummy.

VI. Other Allegations

• Indirect Infringement: The complaint makes a conclusory allegation of induced infringement, stating Defendant induces its customers to infringe (Compl. ¶25). The basis for this appears to be the act of selling a product intended for consumption, which is the act of direct infringement for a composition claim.
• Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on Defendant’s purported continuation of infringing conduct after receiving "actual notice" from the Plaintiff prior to the lawsuit (Compl. ¶16; Compl. ¶26).

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

• A core issue will be one of definitional scope: how will the court construe the term "beta-hydroxybutyrate mixed salt"? The answer will determine whether the infringement analysis is limited to the product's three BHB ingredients or must also account for the numerous other compounds and their associated anions present in the gummy, a factor that could be dispositive for the "other anions omitted" limitation.
• A key evidentiary question will be one of compositional fact: does the accused gummy's formulation, as manufactured, contain sodium, calcium, and magnesium BHB salts within the claimed 10-70% by-weight range relative to each other? While the product label supports the allegation, this will likely require expert testing and analysis to resolve.
• A third question centers on form factor classification: can a "gummy" be considered a "solid...form" under the claim, or does it constitute a "gel form" that the patent specification distinguishes as a non-preferred embodiment? The outcome of this question could decide the infringement issue at a high level, independent of the product's specific chemical makeup.