Rare Breed Renews Push to Block AS Designs’ MP5 Forced Reset Trigger After Prototype Leak
Rare Breed Triggers (RBT) and ABC IP have renewed their motion for a temporary restraining order (TRO) to stop AS Designs from releasing its ARHK forced reset trigger (FRT).
The ARHK is a forced reset trigger built for Heckler & Koch roller-delayed firearms such as the MP5. RBT claims the ARHK copies its own trigger design, and it went to court to keep the product off the market before a single unit could be sold.
This isn’t the first time RBT and ABC IP have gone after a competitor. The two companies have a long, litigious history of suing other forced reset trigger makers. In many corners of the gun community, that track record has earned them a reputation for trying to use the courts to corner the FRT market rather than compete in it.
A Settlement With Strings Attached
The latest fight has an added twist. RBT entered into a legal agreement with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) that includes a commitment to aggressively enforce its patents. That settlement came out of National Association for Gun Rights (NAGR) v. Bondi, the case that challenged the ATF’s position that forced reset triggers are machine guns.
The settlement ended the government’s fight against RBT, but it came with a catch. The ATF’s stated goal is to prevent the dissemination of FRTs, and RBT’s promise to enforce its patents lines up neatly with that goal. Critics have pointed out the irony: an agency that spent years trying to classify these triggers as machine guns now has a private company doing the work of limiting who can make them.
To be fair, RBT and ABC IP were filing patent infringement cases long before the settlement. The agreement didn’t create their appetite for litigation. What it did was give the companies another reason to keep suing, and it gave the ATF a way to limit forced reset triggers without winning in court.
The First Attempt Failed
Last week, a judge in the Eastern District of Texas denied RBT and ABC IP’s motion for a TRO, citing insufficient evidence.
That ruling made sense. At the time, RBT and ABC IP didn’t have a sample of the AS Designs trigger to compare with their own MP5 trigger. They were asking a federal court to block a product they had never examined. A TRO is an extraordinary remedy, and courts generally want to see real evidence of likely success and irreparable harm before granting one. Claims alone weren’t enough.
Now that has changed.
How the Prototype Got Out
Before the ARHK’s launch, AS Designs sent five prototype triggers to four firearms influencers for review. Each trigger came with an express agreement: the influencers wouldn’t share the triggers with anyone, and they would return them when the review was done.
It’s a common practice in the industry. Manufacturers send pre-production samples to reviewers so content is ready when the product launches, and they rely on trust and written agreements to keep those samples from leaking.
AS Designs sent five triggers to four influencers. After the product was sent to influencers one of the triggers ended up in the hands of RBT and ABC IP’s lawyers.
With a physical sample in hand, the companies went back to court, and the motion for a TRO has been reopened. The very gap the judge pointed to when denying the first motion has now been filled, thanks to a prototype that was never supposed to leave the reviewer’s possession.
Who Sent It?
Three of the four influencers have criticized Rare Breed Triggers before. All three have publicly stated that they did not, and would not, help RBT and ABC IP in what they see as the companies’ pursuit of a monopoly on forced reset triggers.
PrintShootReport (PSR) has since directly named Steve_MP5 as the influencer who sent the ARHK to Rare Breed, but AmmoLand News still has not found 100% irrefutable evidence of his involvement.
AmmoLand News reached out to Steve_MP5 via Instagram for comment, but the influencer chose not to respond. His Instagram account has now been deleted.
Why It Matters
This case goes beyond one trigger for one platform. For small manufacturers, it shows how exposed they are when facing a well-funded competitor with a history of litigation. Sending review samples is a normal part of launching a product. If those samples can be turned over to opposing lawyers and used as evidence, small companies will have to think twice about how, and to whom, they send prototypes.
For reviewers, it raises questions of trust. Manufacturers and influencers depend on each other. Companies get exposure, and reviewers get early access to products their audiences want to see. That system only works if agreements are honored. When one breaks down, it hurts the whole community, not just one company.
For gun owners, the stakes are simple. Fewer companies making forced reset triggers means fewer choices and higher prices. Competition drives innovation and keeps prices down. If one company can use patent litigation, backed by a settlement with the federal government, to keep rivals off the market, consumers lose.
It also matters that the ATF’s stated goal of limiting the spread of FRTs is being advanced through private lawsuits rather than through Congress or the courts. Gun owners who celebrated the end of the government’s case against RBT may not have expected the settlement to turn the company into a gatekeeper for the entire FRT market.
What Comes Next
The court will now decide whether the prototype gives RBT and ABC IP enough evidence to justify a TRO. If the motion is granted, AS Designs could be blocked from selling the ARHK while the patent case moves forward, which can take months or even years. If it’s denied again, AS Designs can bring the trigger to market while the larger fight plays out.
Either way, the case will be watched closely by other FRT makers, reviewers, and gun owners who want to know whether forced reset triggers will remain a competitive market or become a one-company product.
AmmoLand News will continue to follow the case and report on any rulings.
About John Crump
Mr. Crump is an NRA instructor and constitutional activist with more than 26 years of experience in networking and cybersecurity for major Fortune 100 companies. John has written about firearms, the Constitution, and cybersecurity, and has interviewed people from all walks of life. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons. Follow him on X at @right2bear, or at www.crumpy.com.