The Court will address this and other outstanding deadlines upon the resolution of defense counsel’s motion. RESPONSE to Motion re 51 MOTION to Withdraw as Attorney filed by United States of America. Plaintiff’s request to respond to defense counsel’s motion, ECF No. 51 at 2, is granted. REPLY in Opposition to the United States’ Motion for a Preliminary Injunction filed by All Defendants.
Partisan Trigger QC Notice – Important Information for Partisan Disruptor FRT Owners
The parties’ discovery obligations are otherwise suspended until Defendants retain new counsel. The Court granted defense counsel’s motion to withdraw. The Court addressed defense counsel’s pending motion to withdraw and obtained additional information about the nature of counsel’s asserted conflict as indicated in the motion. An ex parte video conference regarding defense counsel’s 51 motion to withdraw was held before Judge Morrison on May 4, 2023.
Prior Art and the ‘067 Patent Problem for Rare Breed
The reset is faster than many factory triggers, enabling quicker pulls. A forced reset trigger physically drives the trigger forward after each shot through mechanical force generated by the cycling action of the firearm. Rare Breed Triggers, through its licensing entity ABC IP, LLC, filed suit against Peak Tactical alleging that the Partisan Disruptor trigger infringes multiple Rare Breed patents related to forced reset trigger technology. 81-4 The National Firearms Act, 26 U.S.C. 5845(b) defines “machine gun” to include any combination of parts designed and intended for use in converting a weapon to shoot automatically more than one shot, without manual reloading, by a single function of the trigger. But a month later, trouble with forced reset triggers has returned.
- The Court denied Defendants’ motion to narrow the scope of the subpoena to exclude or redact the third party customers’ names or other identifying information.
- The controversy centers on whether the device constitutes a machine gun conversion or simply an advanced trigger design, with implications for firearm regulations, Second Amendment rights, and the legal boundaries of semi-automatic firearm modifications.
- The X-PRT™ 90 (formerly marketed as FRT90) is a purpose-built cross progressive reset trigger system developed by Dorin Technologies exclusively for the FN PS90 platform.
- “These devices turn regular guns into machine guns, and there’s a reason they’re illegal,” Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield said in a statement.
Most notably, the judge declined to issue an immediate TRO and instead took the motion under advisement, meaning no emergency relief was granted. On February 4, 2026, the court held an extensive hearing on Rare Breed’s request for a temporary restraining order (TRO) and preliminary injunction that would have immediately halted the sale of the Partisan Disruptor trigger. Peak Tactical strongly disputes these claims, arguing that the Partisan Disruptor is not a forced reset trigger at all, but rather an assisted reset trigger with materially different mechanical operation, geometry, and function.
The development of this case holds interest for all gun owners, whether they purchased an FRT-15 themselves or not. Rare Breed Triggers caused quite the stir when they released their FRT-15 trigger for AR-style rifles last year. And stay in touch with newsletters of our best articles on techniques, guns, & gear. Armed with a degree in journalism, she’s penned thousands of articles for the gun industry. Jacki Billings delved into the world of guns while earning her black belt in Yongmudo.
RESPONSE in Opposition re 80 MOTION in Limine regarding mass shootings filed by United States of America. Joint MOTION for Extension of Time to File the parties’ respective proposed witness and exhibit lists, remaining motions in limine, and oppositions to motions in limine (if any) by United States of America. Consent MOTION for Protective Order to modify current motion by United States of America. STATUS REPORT regarding discovery and the Court’s Temporary Restraining Order. Instructions on filing sealed documents on ECF are located at Counsel is directed to file the relevant documents under seal as a separate entry.
A status conference was held before Judge Morrison regarding Defendants’ outstanding discovery motions. Defendants’ request 69 for leave to file a reply to the Government’s opposition motion to Defendants’ motion for a protective order is granted. ORDER granting Plaintiff’s motion 64 for leave to file a response. Responses to such motions shall be filed on or before July 17, 2023.
The parties’ scheduling order 47 remains in effect, but the parties may jointly move to amend if they wish, provided that the last of their submissions are filed on or before June 5, 2023. With Defendants’ consent, the temporary restraining order 11 is extended until and including July 26, 2023, unless it is rendered moot before that date as a result of the Court’s decision on Plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction. For the reasons outlined in the attached memorandum, Defendants’ motion to transfer this action to the Western District of Texas is denied. Since issuing that directive, Defendants have so filed 44 . Motions related to discovery may frt trigger be addressed to Judge Morrison in the first instance. In the meantime, the parties shall proceed to merits discovery.
