Dynamic Engineering sues AlanJamesEngineer, Inc. and an individual engineer, alleging they resealed its balcony rehabilitation drawings

The complaint

Dynamic Engineering Design & Inspection, Inc. v. Alan Patrick James, P.E. and AlanJamesEngineer, Inc., No. 8:26-cv-02858 (M.D. Fla., Tampa Division), was filed September 22, 2026 (14 pages). Dynamic, formerly known as M2 Engineering & Consulting, Inc., is a structural engineering firm in Bradenton, Florida. The defendants are James, a licensed Florida professional engineer in Sarasota County, and the engineering firm he owns and operates, based in Nokomis, Florida. Dynamic demands a jury trial. A docket entry dated September 23, 2026 assigns the case to Judge Steven D. Merryday and Magistrate Judge Anthony E. Porcelli. (Compl. caption; paras. 2 to 4, 11 to 13; ECF No. 2.)

The works

The complaint alleges that under a June 8, 2023 professional services agreement with a property association, Dynamic prepared signed and sealed structural drawings for a balcony rehabilitation project, and that the agreement reserved Dynamic's ownership and copyright and barred reuse or modification without written authorization. It alleges the Copyright Office registered the drawings as a group of three unpublished works under VAu 1-596-666, effective August 6, 2026. The Copyright Office public record for VAu 1-596-666 lists claimant Dynamic Engineering Design and Inspection Inc. and that date. (Compl. paras. 14 to 16, 23 to 26; Copyright Office record.)

What it alleges

The complaint alleges that the defendants knew of Dynamic's role and ownership but used its drawings as the basis for their own, altered and removed design elements, reissued them under James's professional seal, and represented them as their own work in a proposal for the project, and that Dynamic was then excluded from the project. It alleges Dynamic sent a demand letter on or about April 16, 2026 seeking removal of the drawings, preservation of evidence, and payment of $103,800, and that James has not substantively responded. (Compl. paras. 5, 17 to 22, 27 to 28, 38 to 39.)

The counts and relief

Count I pleads copyright infringement under 17 U.S.C. 501 and seeks a declaration, preliminary and permanent injunctions, impoundment and destruction of infringing copies including permit submittals, actual damages and profits under 17 U.S.C. 504(b), an accounting, interest, and costs. Count II pleads tortious interference with Dynamic's business relationship with the association, and Count III pleads unjust enrichment, seeking restitution and disgorgement. (Compl. Counts I to III.)

On the docket

The docket lists an Order (ECF No. 5) and an entry titled Complaint (ECF No. 6), both on September 24, 2026, and neither is available for free online. It also shows summonses returned executed, two entries extending time to answer or respond, and, on October 30, 2026, orders on motions for extensions of time to answer. (Docket, ECF Nos. 5, 6, 12 to 15.)