Arbor Systems Sues XTI Aerospace in Colorado on an Air Transportation Patent.

The XTI complaint

The case is Arbor Systems LLC v. XTI Aerospace, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-05370 (D. Colo.), a five-page complaint for patent infringement filed October 20, 2026, ECF No. 1. The complaint says Arbor Systems LLC "is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of New Mexico" with its principal place of business in Albuquerque, New Mexico. It says XTI Aerospace, Inc. is a corporation organized and existing under the laws of Nevada with an established place of business in Englewood, Colorado. The complaint is signed by Isaac Rabicoff of Rabicoff Law LLC in Chicago, Illinois. The docket lists the case as assigned to Judge Gordon P. Gallagher.

Jurisdiction and venue

The complaint pleads subject matter jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 1331 and 1338(a). It pleads personal jurisdiction because XTI has engaged in systematic and continuous business activities in the district and has committed acts of patent infringement in the district. It pleads venue under 28 U.S.C. 1400(b) because XTI has an established place of business in the district and has committed acts of infringement there.

The '178 patent

The complaint identifies U.S. Patent No. 12,197,178, titled "Air transportation systems and methods," and says it issued on January 14, 2025, from an application filed on April 14, 2023. The complaint alleges that Arbor is the assignee of all right, title and interest in the patent. Google Patents lists Bao Tran as the inventor. Its assignee field reads "Individual," and its event list shows no recorded assignment to Arbor. Arbor asserted the '178 patent earlier in Arbor Systems LLC v. Leonardo S.p.A., No. 2:26-cv-00358 (E.D. Tex.), filed May 4, 2026.

The infringement allegations

The complaint pleads one count. It alleges direct infringement of one or more claims, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, by making, using, offering to sell, selling, or importing exemplary products identified in attached charts, and by employees' internal testing and use of those products. It alleges that service of the complaint, together with the attached claim charts, constitutes actual knowledge of infringement. It alleges induced infringement, literally or under the doctrine of equivalents, at least since service of the complaint and the corresponding claim charts. The complaint says Exhibit 2 includes charts comparing the exemplary claims to the exemplary products, and that the exemplary products satisfy all elements of the exemplary claims.

The relief sought

The prayer asks for a judgment that the patent is valid and enforceable, a judgment of direct and indirect infringement, an accounting, damages under 35 U.S.C. 284 with interest and costs, and a declaration that the case is exceptional under 35 U.S.C. 285 with attorney fees. The complaint demands a jury.

Two other complaints filed the same day

On October 20, 2026, Arbor also filed Arbor Systems LLC v. Terra Ferma LLC, No. 1:26-cv-05371 (D. Colo.), and Arbor Systems LLC v. Tonal Systems, Inc., No. 1:26-cv-03513 (E.D. Va.).

What to watch next

Watch for service of the XTI complaint and for an answer or a Rule 12 motion.

Also watch whether Arbor Systems LLC v. XTI Aerospace, Inc. is related to or coordinated with Arbor Systems LLC v. Terra Ferma LLC, No. 1:26-cv-05371 (D. Colo.).

Also watch whether the assignment records for the '178 patent are updated to show Arbor.