Wilco Marsh Buggies & Draglines, Inc. v. EIK Engineering Sdn. Bhd. (6-19-CV-00565-ADA)

We represented EIK Engineering Sdn. Bhd. ("EIK Engineering") against a claim for patent infringement filed by Wilco Marsh Buggies & Draglines, Inc. ("Wilco") in the Western District of Texas. Soon after the case was filed, we filed a motion to dismiss the case in its entirety. The Court set a hearing and, after considering both parties' positions, found that the relevant factors weighed heavily in EIK Engineering' s favor and entered an order dismissing the case in its entirety.

Integrated Production Services, Inc. v. Epic Lift Systems, LLC (4:14-cv-00246)

Our client, Epic Lift Systems, LLC ("Epic"), was sued for patent infringement based on three plunger lift patents owned by oil and gas giant Integrated Production Services ("IPS"). The patents had been successfully asserted against another defendant and survived prior invalidity challenges before the United States Patent and Trademark Office.  Despite IPS' representation to the Court that another invalidity challenge would be futile, we filed an inter partes review ("IPR") petition against each of the three patents. The Patent Trial and Appeals Board ("PTAB") instituted trial on all three petitions, finding there was a reasonable likelihood all challenged claims would be invalid based on the asserted prior art. After the first IPR was instituted, we requested that the Court stay the litigation pending the outcome of the IPR proceedings. The Court granted our request, saving our client hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation expenses while the IPR proceedings continued. Before IPS was required to file a full response to the petitions, the parties were able to resolve their dispute and the IPR and litigation proceedings were jointly dismissed.

Rusted Rock Barn, LLC v. Russell Tisdale Construction, LLC et al. (H-18-3889)

We represented all defendants in a copyright and trade dress infringement claim filed by Rusted Rock Barn, LLC ("Rusted Rock") in the Southern District of Texas. Rusted Rock alleged that Defendants had copied the look and appearance of a wedding barn reception hall and chapel and sought a preliminary injunction to prevent Defendants from using their venue. At the initial case management conference, the Court permitted the parties to argue the merits of the motion for preliminary injunction. Less than a week after the hearing, the Court denied the motion in its entirety and the case was quickly resolved thereafter.

Multilift Wellbore Technology Limited et al v. ESP Completion Technologies LLC  (4:2017-cv-02611)

We represented the plaintiff, Multilift Wellbore Technology Limited ("Multilift"), in asserting a patent covering an innovative sand control device for use in oil and gas wells. The remarkable technology solved the decades old problem of sand flowing down by gravity and clogging or plugging up a downhole pump, which could result in hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of remediation work. The defendant was directly competing with Multilift with a device believed to be covered by the patent. After several months of litigation, the Court held a claim construction hearing and ultimately interpreted the disputed claim terms consistent with our proposed claim constructions. This major victory helped lead to the case being resolved several months later. 

Schoeller-Bleckmann Oilfield AG v. Churchill Drilling Tools US, Inc. et al. (3:13-0100)

We represented all defendants in a patent infringement suit filed by plaintiff Schoeller-Bleckmann in the Southern District of Texas. Plaintiff alleged that defendants oil and gas dart system infringed a dart activating mechanism patent. Prior to the claim construction phase of litigation, we filed an inter partes review ("IPR") petition challenging the validity of the patent. The petition was instituted by the U.S. Patent and Trademarks Appeal Board ("PTAB") and the Court stayed the litigation in its entirety pending the outcome of the IPR proceedings, saving our client hundreds of thousands of dollars in litigation expenses. the PTAB ultimately cancelled all challenged claims as invalid. The underlying litigation was dismissed soon thereafter, with defendants' being awarded their costs. 

Hark`n Technologies, Inc. et al. v. RFE Sporting Goods, Inc. et al. (1:18-cv-00245)

We represented all defendants in a patent infringement suit filed by plaintiff Hark'n Technologies, Inc.  Upon reviewing the complaint, we quickly identified the amount in controversy and determined it was de minimus relative to the cost of defending against the claims. Despite repeated early efforts to resolve the case without substantial expense, plaintiff pushed for full-fledged discovery. We filed an emergency motion with the Court seeking magistrate managed settlement discussions. The Court allowed us to argue our motoin at the initial case management conference and ultimately entered an order finding the case exceptional under 35 U.S.C. § 285. Among other things, the Court ruled that if defendants' representations about the amount in controversy were truthful, then plaintiff would be ordered to pay all of defendants' attorneys' fees. The case was resolved within two weeks of the Court entering its sanctions order. 

Weatherford Int'l, Inc. et al. v. Peak Completion Technologies, Inc.  (H-08-1450)

We represented the Weatherford entities as plaintiffs seeking a declaratory judgment of non-infringement and invalidity against Peak Completion Technologies, Inc., which was necessitated by threats of infringement. We prevailed at the claim construction stage, obtaining favorable claim construction rulings from the Court on several key disputed issues. The Court entered a claim construction order construing key disputed terms in plaintiff's favor. Several months later, the Court ruled on plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment of non-infringement, finding that there was no infringement and ordering defendant to pay Weatherford's costs.