The EVERY Company has upped the ante in a high-profile IP dispute initiated by fellow alt protein startup Onego Bio with a motion asking the court in Delaware for sanctions against Onego Bio for what it describes as “improper duplicative litigation based on false factual allegations.”
Onego Bio, in turn, says evidence contradicts sworn statements made by EVERY executives.
In the combative filing,* attorneys for The EVERY Co accuse Onego Bio and its lawyers of violating federal rules* designed to prevent frivolous or abusive litigation by filing duplicative lawsuits in two jurisdictions and advancing allegations EVERY says are knowingly false.
“Onego’s false allegations are not made in good faith and have forced EVERY and this Court to waste resources on litigation that does not involve a live dispute,” according to EVERY. “That is sanctionable.”
The dispute—one of several high-profile IP spats in the alt protein space over the past couple of years—is being closely watched in a sector where drawn-out IP battles can derail fundraising, spook potential partners, and drain resources.
The motion for sanctions filed in Delaware follows an order from a court in Wisconsin tossing the case there for lack of personal jurisdiction.
EVERY: Onego Bio’s allegations are ‘flat out false’
The EVERY Co filing argues that the case should be dismissed with monetary sanctions imposed on Onego and its lawyers to “compensate EVERY and deter Onego and its counsel from future baseless litigation.”
According to The EVERY Co: “Onego’s factual allegations are false – particularly its claim that EVERY’s ovalbumin product contains additional amino acids that are not bioidentical to natural egg protein. EVERY provided Onego with definitive testing results showing that fact. Onego has EVERY’s product and could do the same testing and get the same results.”
Furthermore, “Even a brief review of the record demonstrates” that “EVERY never threatened Onego or attempted to enforce its patents,” it insists. “Onego’s jurisdictional allegations are flat out false.”
The EVERY Co CEO Arturo Elizondo told AgFunderNews: “Lawsuits should not be the norm in our industry. Filing identical, duplicative lawsuits – even more so. We hope this sends a signal that there are real consequences. We live in a society where it’s far too easy to take someone to court. Where the only winners are the lawyers.”
He added: “Frivolous litigation should not be rewarded. For startups to engage in this is absurd. Our space needs success stories, not infighting. Like I’ve said before, lawsuits are a waste of time and money. We all deserve better.”
Onego Bio: EVERY’s products are not bioidentical to natural egg proteins
Onego Bio sent us a statement alleging that contrary to statements made under oath by EVERY executives, “Independent analyses conducted by a third-party university facility on commercially purchased OvoBoost and OvoPro products [from The EVERY Company] identified amino acid extensions not present in natural egg proteins.”
These findings “indicate that the products are not, as claimed, identical to natural egg protein at the amino acid level, and are in fact genetically modified variants,” claims Onego Bio.
What the case is about
The IP dispute—initiated by Onego Bio last fall—relates to the production of ovalbumin, the primary protein in egg white, via precision fermentation. The dispute centers on whether Onego—which uses a strain of the fungus Trichoderma reesei as its production host—is infringing a “foundational” patent from EVERY covering ovalbumin expression in a range of hosts.
Onego also alleges that EVERY engaged in false advertising by misrepresenting its products as bio-identical to egg proteins when they in fact contained “extra amino acids” not found in “natural egg proteins,” claims EVERY denies.
Onego Bio further alleges that it has 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 alleges that “Onego has at all times been the only antagonist and issuer of threats while EVERY has consistently counseled against litigation.”
Onego says it filed in Wisconsin because it’s planning to build a facility there, and that it also filed in Delaware because both parties are incorporated there and it is a “leading forum for complex biotech patent disputes.”
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.
*The case is Onego Bio Inc v Clara Foods (d.b.a. The EVERY Company) in the US District Court in Delaware. Case 1:25-cv-01131. The related case was filed in the Western District of Wisconsin Case # 3:25-cv-00761.
** The EVERY Co alleges Onego Bio violated Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the rules governing civil litigation in US federal courts, and section 1927, a provision in Title 28 of the US code covering the federal judiciary and judicial procedure.
Further reading:
Judge tosses Onego Bio lawsuit vs EVERY Co in Wisconsin, parallel case in Delaware still in motion
‘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 EVERY Co raises $55m to scale egg proteins via fermentation, crosses line ‘from promise to proof
