Integra Mission Critical v. Integra Testing Services (W.D. Tex. 5:26-cv-07077): INTEGRA trademark suit

Integra Mission Critical, LLC, doing business as Integra, sued Integra Testing Services, LLC on November 5, 2026, in the Western District of Texas, No. 5:26-cv-07077. It alleges that the testing company's INTEGRA and INTEGRA TESTING branding for HVAC testing, adjusting and balancing services marketed to data centers infringes its incontestable INTEGRA MISSION CRITICAL registration and common-law INTEGRA rights.

The complaint

Integra Mission Critical, LLC d/b/a Integra v. Integra Testing Services, LLC, No. 5:26-cv-07077 (W.D. Tex.), is a 16-page complaint filed November 5, 2026 in the San Antonio Division, with a jury demand. The plaintiff, based in Dallas, Texas, designs, builds, and delivers turnkey and modular data center facilities and components, including some HVAC testing and related service work integrated with its equipment. The defendant is a Delaware limited liability company based in Mentor, Ohio, with an office in El Paso, Texas, that the complaint describes as a national provider of commercial HVAC testing, adjusting and balancing, mechanical testing, and controlled-environment testing services.

The marks

The complaint asserts INTEGRA MISSION CRITICAL in standard characters, Reg. No. 5,541,214, and common-law rights in INTEGRA and INTEGRA MISSION CRITICAL. USPTO TSDR shows the registration as live on the Principal Register, registered August 14, 2018, owned by Integra Mission Critical LLC, for "modular data center components and data center modules comprised of power supplies, electrical switchgear, electrical switchboards, electrical distribution boards, electrical controls, electrical power distribution units, electrical cables and electrical connectors, featuring cooling and ventilation components, all of the modules and components of which are integrated with site-built construction" in Class 9. It disclaims MISSION CRITICAL, and TSDR shows a combined Sections 8 and 15 declaration accepted and acknowledged on February 8, 2024. The complaint alleges first use since at least June 1, 2018 and calls INTEGRA the dominant element of the mark.

What Integra alleges

According to the complaint, the defendant uses INTEGRA and INTEGRA TESTING on its integratesting.com website and marketing, markets its services to data centers, and holds itself out as "the nation's largest data center testing, adjusting and balancing (TAB) and commissioning provider." It alleges, on information and belief, that the defendant began using INTEGRA in or around 2022. It also alleges that the defendant exhibited under those names at a national data center industry conference in San Antonio on or about October 25 to 28, 2026, which the plaintiff also attended. The plaintiff says its personnel learned of the defendant's use of the INTEGRA name through a testing, adjusting and balancing report on a project it was working on. It walks through the Fifth Circuit's digits of confusion and argues that the strength of its registration and the shared dominant term INTEGRA weigh heavily toward a likelihood of confusion.

The complaint alleges that the plaintiff, by a letter dated February 25, 2026, demanded that the defendant stop all use of INTEGRA and INTEGRA TESTING for goods or services intended for data centers or similar controlled-environment infrastructure, and that the defendant, after further correspondence, confirmed it would not overhaul its current branding and would not stop using its mark in connection with the distinct services it provides to its data center and mission-critical infrastructure clients.

Claims and relief

Count I alleges infringement of a registered mark under 15 U.S.C. § 1114, Count II unfair competition and false designation of origin under 15 U.S.C. § 1125(a), and Count III Texas common-law trademark infringement and unfair competition, and the complaint calls the infringement willful. It asks for a permanent injunction against any INTEGRA designation for goods or services marketed to data centers or similar controlled-environment or mission-critical infrastructure, an accounting and disgorgement of profits, actual and enhanced damages, attorneys' fees in an exceptional case under 15 U.S.C. § 1117(a), and destruction or recall of materials under 15 U.S.C. § 1118.

Docket

The docket shows the case assigned on November 5, 2026 to Judge Jason K. Pulliam, a summons issued to the defendant on November 6, 2026, and two orders entered November 9, 2026, one of them referring the case to a magistrate judge.

Attorney advertising. General information, not legal advice. Reading this site does not create an attorney-client relationship. Nothing here guarantees or predicts the outcome of any particular matter. Michael P. Eddy is a patent attorney registered with the United States Patent and Trademark Office (Reg. No. 42,505) and a member of the State Bar of California (No. 189669). Practice through Law Office of Michael P. Eddy. Not admitted in any other state.