Apr 21, 2025Seakeeper v. Dometic
Seakeeper Sues Dometic Over the DG3 — Public Proof of the Litigation Pattern (D. Del. 1:25-cv-00484-JCB)
On April 21, 2025 — about ten weeks after the DG3’s public launch — Seakeeper Inc. files a patent-infringement complaint (with jury demand) against Dometic Corporation in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, Seakeeper Inc. v. Dometic Corporation, No. 1:25-cv-00484-JCB (Judge John Campbell Barker), asserting U.S. Patent Nos. 7,546,782 and 8,117,930. Seakeeper immediately seeks emergency relief — a preliminary injunction (DE 8) and a TRO (DE 29) to block the DG3. After a hearing, the court DENIES Seakeeper’s TRO and preliminary-injunction motions (DE 87, July 7, 2025); Seakeeper moves for reconsideration (DE 98). Dometic moves to dismiss (DE 90), then answers and files its own counterclaims (DE 138, Dec 22, 2025). The case proceeds into active discovery on a trial track (Scheduling Order DE 141; discovery into 2027). Seakeeper’s corporate parent is disclosed as Madison Sport Corporation (Rule 7.1). The takeaway relevant to SYG: when a competitor enters its market, the incumbent responds with aggressive patent litigation — though here the court declined to block the DG3 at the injunction stage.
Seakeeper Inc. v. Dometic Corp., No. 1:25-cv-00484-JCB (D. Del.), Compl. filed Apr 21, 2025 (U.S. Pat. Nos. 7,546,782; 8,117,930); DE 8 / DE 29 (PI & TRO); DE 87 Memorandum & Order denying TRO/PI (Jul 7, 2025); DE 90 Mtn. to Dismiss; DE 138 Answer & Counterclaim (Dec 22, 2025); DE 141 Scheduling Order; DE 4 Rule 7.1 (parent: Madison Sport Corporation) — PACER, pulled 2026-05-14