Pipeline Contractor John Anderson Construction Sues Rival EnCompass Over a Pig Loader, Quoting EnCompass's Reply Letter.

The parties and the patents

The case is John Anderson Construction, Inc. v. EnCompass Pipeline, LLC, No. 4:26-cv-03004 (M.D. Pa.). The complaint describes John Anderson Construction (JAC) as a Pennsylvania construction firm based in Warren with pipeline operations services, and EnCompass as a Minnesota limited liability company with an address in Grand Rapids, Minnesota, and with Pennsylvania offices in Washington, Troy, and Canonsburg. Both patents are titled Pig Loader Device. The '186 patent issued June 5, 2018, and the '145 patent, a continuation, issued May 9, 2023. The complaint says the inventors are John Anderson, JAC's founder, and John Shelley, and that JAC practices both patents.

According to the complaint, pipelines are cleaned by forcing a plug called a pig through the pipe, and before the invention the pig was introduced through a funnel and held in place with a rod, pipe, or piece of timber while an excavator or bulldozer pushed it in, exposing workers to pinch points and projectiles.

What the patents cover

Claim 1 of the '186 patent covers a pig loader device with a body whose two ends define a longitudinal axis and a bore running between them, a breech formed by an aperture in the body, a ramrod compartment in which a ramrod slides along the axis, a chamber body next to the compartment that receives the pig, a neck that connects the device to an ancillary pipe, and a breech shield that can cover the breech. When the ramrod advances from the first end to the second, it forces the pig through the neck and into the pipe.

Claim 1 of the '145 patent covers the same body, bore, breech, ramrod compartment, chamber body, and neck, but in place of the breech shield it requires a breech plate on the end of the ramrod that contacts the pig and forces it through the neck into the pipe. Claim 8 covers a breech assembly with a chamber body, ramrod compartment, breech, and neck, and a ramrod with a breech plate on its end; the neck connects to the pipe and guides the pig in, and the compartment aligns the ramrod so that advancing the breech plate toward the neck forces the pig into the pipe. Claim 18 covers a body with the ramrod compartment between its two ends, a breech located between the compartment and the second end through which the pig enters or leaves, a chamber body that receives the pig through the breech, and a ramrod, partly inside the compartment and extending beyond the body's first end, that advances the pig toward the second end.

What the complaint alleges

The complaint alleges that EnCompass makes and uses the accused pig loader device in the district and elsewhere in the United States, in competition with JAC on the same pipeline service projects, and it relies on claim charts filed as an exhibit. It says JAC's June 24, 2026 letter identified the asserted claims, demanded that EnCompass stop, and offered to sell or license the device. It says EnCompass's August 3, 2026 reply stated that EnCompass "can also further distinguish its Device from the 145 patent by modifying it so that the Pig can be loaded from either direction," which the complaint reads as an admission of current infringement of the '145 patent, and that EnCompass said it would not entertain settlement discussions and that JAC needed to commence litigation.

Each count alleges direct infringement under 35 U.S.C. 271(a) and willfulness. Venue is pleaded under 28 U.S.C. 1391 and 1400 based on EnCompass's field office in Troy, Pennsylvania and alleged acts of infringement in the district.

Relief requested

JAC asks for damages, a willfulness finding with trebled damages under 35 U.S.C. 284, an exceptional case finding and fees under 35 U.S.C. 285, a permanent injunction, exemplary and punitive damages, pre- and post-judgment interest, and costs. It demands a jury.

What it means

The complaint describes this as a competitor suit over equipment used on pipeline jobs, and the letter exchange gives JAC a pre-suit notice date for its willfulness theory. The complaint treats EnCompass's design-around remark as an admission. Expect the parties to dispute what that letter means, along with claim limitations such as the breech shield in the '186 patent and the breech plate and breech location in the '145 patent.

What to watch next

Watch for EnCompass's answer or motion to dismiss, any counterclaims of invalidity or noninfringement, whether EnCompass modifies its device, and any motion for preliminary relief.