Surprised it took this long.

https://www.sigsauer.com/blog/...inst-springfield-inc

SIG SAUER, Inc. Files P365 Magazine Patent Infringement Case Against Springfield, Inc.

NEWINGTON, N.H., (May 11, 2021) – Today, SIG SAUER, Inc., filed a lawsuit in the United States District Court for the Central District of Illinois, Rock Island Division, alleging that Springfield, Inc. (Springfield Armory) infringes two SIG patents relating to SIG’s P365 magazine.

The P365 has seen tremendous commercial success, due to the innovative design of the high-capacity magazine. In its complaint, SIG alleges that Springfield Armory’s making and selling of certain “Hellcat” branded magazines infringes upon two SIG patents. SIG SAUER is seeking injunctive relief, as well as monetary damages for Springfield Armory’s past and ongoing infringement.

Ron Cohen, President, and Chief Executive Officer, made the following statement:

“When the SIG SAUER P365 was introduced it took the market by storm as the most innovative high-capacity, micro-compact pistol to be introduced due to its magazine capacity, and quickly became one of the top-selling handguns in the market due to this unprecedented innovation. SIG is not a litigious company, but given the extent of infringement by Springfield, SIG has a responsibility to protect both our intellectual property and the significant investment we make to develop our innovative products. As a company, we are proud to yield more than 100 patents worldwide, with more than 40 patent applications currently pending, and we will protect the extensive research and design that goes into developing these patents rigorously.”

I did think it was interesting and odd that Sig made such a big deal out of the "revolutionary new and improved micro 9mm double stack magazine" but Springfield released one at almost the same time as well. I thought well it must not be THAT revolutionary.

I guess this may be why.

There must be some interesting discussions happing in board rooms at S&W and Ruger right about now.

Of course, SIG has to actually win case.

I wonder if Wilhelm Bubits will sue Sig then. He Designed this years before with the subcompact caracal. It was on 23 mm wide and held I believe 13 rounds. His mag used concentric decreasing spring that compresses more upon itself as the mag is loaded, in addition to the its external dimensions.

quote:

Originally posted by Jester814:
I did think it was interesting and odd that Sig made such a big deal out of the "revolutionary new and improved micro 9mm double stack magazine" but Springfield released one at almost the same time as well. I thought well it must not be THAT revolutionary.

I guess this may be why.

Or it means both companies came up with same design, at the same time and Sig sent off the patent at 1:00 EST while Springfield at 1:00 CST (and both postmarked accordingly for each of their respective time zones).

quote:

Springfield released one at almost the same time as well. I thought well it must not be THAT revolutionary.

The Hellcat came out over a year and a half after the P365. Plenty of time for HS and Springfield to analyze the SIG patents and proceed on from there. As for the managers and executives at Ruger and S&W sweating bullets; I was kind of thinking the same thing when I read the alert from TFB this afternoon. Get the popcorn ready...

quote:

Originally posted by monoblok:

quote:

Springfield released one at almost the same time as well. I thought well it must not be THAT revolutionary.

The Hellcat came out over a year and a half after the P365. Plenty of time for HS and Springfield to analyze the SIG patents and proceed on from there. As for the managers and executives at Ruger and S&W sweating bullets; I was kind of thinking the same thing when I read the alert from TFB this afternoon. Get the popcorn ready...

Yup, the P365 was way ahead of the me too crowd.

quote:

Originally posted by sox:
I wonder if Wilhelm Bubits will sue Sig then. He Designed this years before with the subcompact caracal. It was on 23 mm wide and held I believe 13 rounds. His mag used concentric decreasing spring that compresses more upon itself as the mag is loaded, in addition to the its external dimensions.

Isn´t there a difference in the SIGSauer of 2019 and the Bubits patent of 2004? From what I have learned is one protecting the follower and path from double to single stack, the other (Bubits) to the spring design.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: OTD,

Likely Hellcat owners are stocking up on mags, big time, while the getting is good.

quote:

Originally posted by Pipe Smoker:
Likely Hellcat owners are stocking up on mags, big time, while the getting is good.

´

Sure. I´m assuming sarcasm of course.

I´m pretty sure theres one or two smart guys on either side which might opt for a license agreement if it was an patent infringement.

I looked up and posted links on here to SIG's P365 magazine patents before. Their two patents are Design patents, not Utility patents. Design patents are much easier to acquire and don't cover nearly as much as Utility patents. Mostly, Design patents cover the look of something rather than how something functions. In some ways, it's like a trademark.

I don't see SIG's lawsuit getting very far unless they can show that Springfield's [&/or other competitors] mags look so similar to the P365's that the average person couldn't tell them apart. The Hellcat's mags hold one more round, so I think that's a dead giveaway.

ETA: found my post from two years ago w/ links to SIG's patents.
https://sigforum.com/eve/forums...370034164#9370034164

Look at the early HK P7 M 13 mag for inspiration, kinda just like the Sig mag except longer. Also, the Makarov
Hi cap mag. So, hardly innovative.

I would like to see all the mag disassembled and reviewed to really see what is what, from a lurely academic standpoint. Hellcat, P365, shield, all,of em.

There's never been a magazine or pistol for 9mm as compact and tight as the P365. It is absolutely innovative, and it's not just the magazine.

After the press, I had to see one for myself, when the P365 was first introduced, and managed to find a range that had one. I was expecting small, but not that small, and I had to load the mag to see that it really would take ten rounds. Then I had to shoot it. I immediately ordered one. I went across town, stopped in another shop, and they were just unboxing their first ones. I bought one on the spot.

I like a J-frame in my pocket, and I thought the G43 was fantastic (still do). But regardless of what else I'm carrying, I toss a P365 in my pocket.

I have a bunch of compact and subcompact pistols, from the P2000sk to the P239, G26, yada, yada, and owned and carried and shot P7's, Springfields, various 1911's of all brands and makes, and so on, shields, kahrs, and on and on, including the P320 subcompact. Nothing has come close to the P365; it was in a class by itself, and it still amazes me that they can put that many rounds in a magazine that small, including the 15 round mag.

I believe Sig designed that mag, and then the pistol around the mag. Others riding the technology is perhaps inevitable; the immense popularity of the P365 is clear evidence of a large market hungry for those features. It's no surprise that others want a piece, and no shock that Sig would defend it.

Another thing that makes the P365 possible is extensive use of MIM parts - like every part in the receiver except maybe a couple stamped parts - to make small but very complex shapes that otherwise would cost a fortune to machine. Some of them could be 3D printed as well (could be, I don't think any are at the moment), and I've seen examples of 3D printed small gun parts during a sort of internal trade show with a big supplier at work. Good thing the kind or people who would be freaked out by gun parts were not able to recognize them as such.

The receiver chassis seems to make a difference too, because all the competition - Hellcat, G43X, Shield+, LC9 Max are a bit bigger and chunkier.

Design patents are practically useless and this isn’t going anywhere. From my perspective, this nonsense is simply a piss-poor marketing scheme by SigSauer to create buzz, more than anything else.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dakor,

As in my other thread, the original high capacity small 9mm is the Keltec P11. I wonder if there was some patent that Keltec or Mecgar has on the P11 magazine to hold 10 and 12 rounds of 9mm in such a small package and then will sue Sig. God Bless

I don't believe there was anything special about Keltec P-11 mags. The P-11 was made to be compatible w/ S&W Series 59 mags, so the P-11 mag was just a shorter S&W mag.

Also, the P-11 was introduced in 1995, so any patents it might have associated w/ it have expired by now.

quote:

Originally posted by iron chef:
I don't believe there was anything special about Keltec P-11 mags. The P-11 was made to be compatible w/ S&W Series 59 mags, so the P-11 mag was just a shorter S&W mag.

Also, the P-11 was introduced in 1995, so any patents it might have associated w/ it have expired by now.

The P-11 magazines are made by Mec Gar, and the guts of the 12 round version are VERY different than the 10 round version. Probably a patent on the follower, and another on the spring. I've had a P-11 for years, as well as a S&W 5906 and 6906.

Did he patent it?

quote:

Originally posted by sox:
I wonder if Wilhelm Bubits will sue Sig then. He Designed this years before with the subcompact caracal. It was on 23 mm wide and held I believe 13 rounds. His mag used concentric decreasing spring that compresses more upon itself as the mag is loaded, in addition to the its external dimensions.

quote:

Originally posted by BBMW:
Did he patent it?

quote:

Originally posted by sox:
I wonder if Wilhelm Bubits will sue Sig then. He Designed this years before with the subcompact caracal. It was on 23 mm wide and held I believe 13 rounds. His mag used concentric decreasing spring that compresses more upon itself as the mag is loaded, in addition to the its external dimensions.

Likely not successfully suable with no patent, yes. But it would potentially be prior art even without a patent award, and possibly invalidating SIG's own patent if say someone whose might be up a creek--like Springfield--uses it to challenge SIG.