Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
BASF v. Ingevity | Patent Lawsuit 22-1129

BASF Corp. v. Ingevity, Corp.

22-1129 Fed. Cir. Closed US10323553B2
Get a prior-art report

Patentability filed 8 Nov 2021 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 22 Jun 2023, with US10323553B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: appeal dismissed in part.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US10323553B2
Application no.
US15/676734
Case no.
22-1129
Verdict cause
Patentability
Court
Fed. Cir.
Court level
Court of Appeals
Case region
District of Columbia
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
Appeal
Filed – Closed
8 Nov 2021 – 22 Jun 2023
Duration
591 days
Basis of termination
Appeal Dismissed in Part
Products & marks
Evaporative fuel vapor emission control systems
Validity challenges
2 on record
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 22-1129, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Check this patent against your own product

Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Get an FTO claim chart
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US10323553B2 Active App. US15/676734

Evaporative fuel vapor emission control systems

An evaporative emission control canister system comprises an initial adsorbent volume having an effective incremental adsorption capacity at 25° C. of greater than 35 grams n-butane/L between vapor concentration of 5 vol % and 50 vol % n-butane, and at least one subsequent adsorbent volume having an effective incremental adsorption capacity at 25° C. of less than 35 grams n-butane/L between vapor concentration of 5 vol % and 50 vol % n-butane, an effective butane working capacity (BWC) of less than 3 g/dL, and a g-total BWC of between 2 grams and 6 grams. The evaporative emission control canister system has a two-day diurnal breathing loss (DBL) emissions of no more than 20 mg at no more than 210 liters of purge applied after the 40 g/hr butane loading step.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
18 Jun 2019
Earliest priority
10 Oct 2013
Est. expiry
10 Oct 2033
Validity challenges
2 on recordPGR2020-00037 · Other · filed by BASF Corp.PGR2020-00035 · filed by BASF Corporation
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
B01D53/04F02M25/08F01N3/08
Prosecution counsel
CANTOR COLBURN LLP
Examiner
LAWRENCE, JR., FRANK M
US10323553B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US10323553B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

“THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED-IN-PART, VACATED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED”

Case 22-1129 · Fed. Cir. · closed 22 June 2023
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 22-1129?

22-1129 is a patent patentability brought by BASF Corp. against Ingevity, Corp., filed on 8 Nov 2021 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 22 June 2023.

Which patent was asserted in 22-1129?

US10323553B2 (“Evaporative fuel vapor emission control systems”), assigned to INGEVITY SOUTH CAROLINA, LLC, currently active. The record also lists Evaporative fuel vapor emission control systems.

How was case 22-1129 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is appeal dismissed in part. The termination text reads: “THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED-IN-PART, VACATED-IN-PART, AND REMANDED”

How long did case 22-1129 take?

591 calendar days, from filing on 8 Nov 2021 to closure on 22 June 2023.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 22-1129?

Brian Eutermoser, Joshua Nathaniel Mitchell, Mikaela Stone and Paul Alessio Mezzina are recorded as counsel for plaintiff BASF. Brian Buroker, Brian Yang, Katherine Quinn Dominguez, Nathaniel Ryan Scharn and Vladimir J. Semendyai appear for defendant Ingevity.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 22-1129 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 22-1129 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.