A federal judge in Wisconsin has dismissed a high-profile lawsuit filed by Onego Bio against The EVERY Company, ruling that the court lacks personal jurisdiction over EVERY, noting that neither party is incorporated in the state or (yet) has a place of business there. However, parallel litigation in Delaware is ongoing.
The case relates to the production of ovalbumin, the primary protein in egg white, via precision fermentation. The EVERY Company uses yeast as its host microorganism, while Onego Bio uses fungus. The dispute centers on whether Onego is infringing a “foundational” patent from EVERY covering ovalbumin expression in a range of hosts.
In a complaint* filed last fall, Onego Bio claimed that it had been forced to sue to lift the “cloud” hanging over its business and clarify that it is not infringing the patent in question because it is “invalid and unenforceable.”
According to Onego, EVERY demanded “unwarranted patent licensing fees” and engaged in tortious interference by telling potential investors that Onego needed a patent license from EVERY or would be infringing its IP.
EVERY in turn alleged that “Onego has at all times been the only antagonist and issuer of threats while EVERY has consistently counseled against litigation.”
Judge: Court will grant motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction
In an order filed today (May 5), Judge James Peterson rejected arguments that EVERY’s lobbying activities, websites, or possible indirect product sales into Wisconsin established personal jurisdiction.
“Sales of EVERY’s own products in Wisconsin have nothing to do with the enforcement or defense of the ’784 patent. Onego does not allege that any products being sold in Wisconsin are embodiments of the ’784 patent, but even if they are, Onego does not allege that those products help to prove or disprove infringement or invalidity.”
Beyond that, he did not address the merits of the case, however, adding: “The court cannot consider the merits of a claim without first resolving jurisdictional questions.”
While dual filings in two states are not unheard of, courts generally dislike duplicative litigation because it wastes resources, hinted Peterson. “Even if the court assumed that Onego had met that standard to permit jurisdictional discovery, it would be a waste of time and resources to authorize discovery in this case.
“As already discussed, Onego is proceeding on the same claims against EVERY in Delaware, where personal jurisdiction is not an issue.”
EVERY Co CEO: ‘Lawsuit was baseless from the outset’
EVERY Co CEO Arturo Elizondo welcomed the ruling, telling AgFunderNews that, “Today is an important day for EVERY and for our industry. Lawsuits are a waste of time and money. Our space doesn’t need expensive distractions. Our space needs builders. It needs all of our focus and resources to go towards building a better food system – not expensive litigation. We’re thrilled to see the Court dismiss this lawsuit, so we can get back to what really matters.”
He added: “This ruling is a clear sign that the lawsuit was baseless from the onset. We invested a lot of time and resources to build one of the most extensive IP estates in our industry including our foundational ovalbumin patents granted in the US, Finland, UK, Germany, and many other jurisdictions. Our customers, our investors, and our team members value what we’ve built, and we will always defend it.”
Onego Bio said it would provide AgFunderNews with a comment shortly, and we will update the article accordingly.
What’s at stake
👉 Onego Bio—which has outlined plans to build a manufacturing facility in Wisconsin—claims that “EVERY’s continued threats directly impact Onego’s ability to secure investment, finalize business plans, and continue to move forward with its expansion.”
👉 EVERY in turn argues that Onego initiated contact earlier this year seeking a license to EVERY’s patents and “repeatedly threatened to burden EVERY with expensive litigation” if it were not granted.
Harassment, false advertising claims, merger talks
In recent filings, EVERY described the lawsuit as the culmination of a “months-long effort to harass EVERY into granting Onego access to EVERY’s IP.”
Onego in turn said it had a right to “remove the cloud over its business,” adding that EVERY could resolve the dispute by granting Onego a covenant not to sue but is instead “leveraging its patent rights as a strategic weapon.”
It went on to accuse EVERY of engaging in false advertising by misrepresenting its products as bio-identical to egg proteins and claimed EVERY had tried to “force a merger” to access Onego’s manufacturing capabilities and technology, “which actually does create products equivalent to natural egg proteins.
EVERY, in turn, said that the amino acid sequence of its ovalbumin “is identical to native chicken ovalbumin.” It also disputed Onego’s claim that an investor was considering investing $50 million in Onego but pulled back due to “infringement concerns.”
According to EVERY, investors at a meeting in Switzerland last fall “communicated to EVERY and Onego that if the two companies successfully merged, the investors would diligence the resulting NewCo and consider a potential $50 million investment in the NewCo, not in Onego or EVERY individually.”
Further, said EVERY, “No representative of EVERY told those investors, or anyone else at that meeting, that Onego infringes EVERY’s patent rights.”
*The case is Onego Bio Inc v Clara Foods (d.b.a. The EVERY Company) filed on Sept 10 in the US District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin. Case # 3:25-cv-00761
Further reading:
Foodtech IP fight escalates as The EVERY Company and Onego Bio trade accusations
The EVERY Co and Onego Bio eyed merger before IP talks went south, court docs reveal
‘Objectively unreasonable’: Onego Bio slams The Every Co in high-stakes patent fight
Egg protein IP fight escalates as VTT challenges Every Co patent in Europe
🎥 Onego Bio eyes Wisconsin site for chicken-free egg production, files GRAS notice
The post BREAKING: Judge tosses Onego Bio lawsuit vs EVERY Co in Wisconsin, parallel case in Delaware still in motion appeared first on AgFunderNews.
