University of New Mexico
We represented the University of New Mexico ("UNM") defending against multiple inter partes review ("IPR") petitions by the largest semiconductor manufacturers in the world, including Samsung and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing, attempting to invalidate UNM's innovative fin field-effect transistor technology patents. The IPR proceedings were initiated by Samsung, GlobalFoundries and Samsung while there were multiple pending lawsuits against them in the Western District of Texas, Waco Division. The IPR proceedings were dismissed and the patents were not invalidated.
Forum US, Inc.
We represented the patent owner Forum US, Inc. ("Forum") in a patent infringement suit against Progevity Oilfield Systems, LLC ("Progevity"). The technology involved a novel sand filtration system for preventing downhole electrical pumps (called "ESPs") from plugging from sand fallback after the ESP shuts down. After filing a motion for preliminary injunction, Progevity immediately shut down its business and the Court ultimately issued a permanent injunction, which prohibited Progevity from further infringement.
EIK Engineering Sdn Bhd.
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.
Epic Lift Systems, LLC
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. All three inter partes review ("IPR") petitions we filed were instituted, and the Court granted our request to stay the litigation, 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.
Saddle Creek Weddings, LLC
Our attorneys 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.
Churchill Drilling Tools US, Inc.
Our attorneys 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.
RFE Sporting Goods, Inc.
Our attorneys represented all defendants in a patent suit filed by 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 defense. Despite early efforts to resolve the case, 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 motion 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 International, Inc.
Our attorneys 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.