LiquidPower Specialty Products, Inc. v. Baker Hughes Holdings, LLC
Patentability filed 8 Sep 2021 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 13 Apr 2023, with 4 patents asserted. Recorded basis of termination: unpatentable.
Case record
- Patents involved
- US8022118B2US8426498B2US8450250B2US8450249B2
- Case no.
- 21-2285
- 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 Sep 2021 – 13 Apr 2023
- Duration
- 582 days
- Basis of termination
- Unpatentable
- Products & marks
- Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils
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- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils
A system for reducing pressure drop associated with the turbulent flow of asphaltenic crude oil through a conduit. The crude oil has a high asphaltene content and/or a low API gravity. Such reduction in pressure drop is achieved by treating the asphaltenic crude oil with a high molecular weight drag reducing polymer that can have a solubility parameter within about 20 percent of the solubility parameter of the heavy crude oil. The drag reducing polymer can also comprise the residues of monomers having at least one heteroatom.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 20 Sep 2011
- Est. expiry
- 22 Dec 2026
- Validity challenges
- 4 on recordIPR2016-01896 · filed by Baker Hughes IncorporatedIPR2016-00734 · Other · filed by Baker Hughes IncorporatedIPR2016-00734 · Patentability · filed by LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC.IPR2016-01905 · Patentability · filed by LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC., FKA LUBRIZOL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC.
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- MILLIGAN, STUART N. · JOHNSTON, RAY L. · BURDEN, TIMOTHY L. · DREHER, JR., WAYNE R. · SMITH, KENNETH W. · HARRIS, WILLIAM F.
- Classification
- B05D5/08
- Prosecution counsel
- The Lubrizol Corporation
- Examiner
- JAGANNATHAN, VASU
Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils
A method of introducing a drag reducing polymer into a pipeline such that the friction loss associated with the turbulent flow though the pipeline is reduced by suppressing the growth of turbulent eddies. The drag reducing polymer is introduced into a liquid hydrocarbon having an asphaltene content of at least 3 weight percent and/or an API gravity of less than about 26° to thereby produce a treated liquid hydrocarbon. The treated liquid hydrocarbon does not have a viscosity less than the viscosity of the liquid hydrocarbon prior to treatment with the drag reducing polymer. Additionally, the drag reducing polymer is added to the liquid hydrocarbon in the range from about 0.1 to about 500 ppmw.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 23 Apr 2013
- Est. expiry
- 22 Dec 2026
- Validity challenges
- 2 on recordIPR2016-01903 · filed by Baker Hughes Incorporated f/k/a BAKER HUGHES, A GE COMPANY, LLCIPR2016-01905 · Patentability · filed by LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS INC., FKA LUBRIZOL SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC.
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- MILLIGAN, STUART N. · JOHNSTON, RAY L. · BURDEN, TIMOTHY L. · DREHER, WAYNE R. · SMITH, KENNETH W. · HARRIS, WILLIAM F.
- Classification
- C09K8/588B05D5/08
- Prosecution counsel
- The Lubrizol Corporation
- Examiner
- BOYLE, ROBERT C
Also asserted in this case
2 moreThe docket lists 4 asserted patents. Full bibliographic detail, drawings and prosecution history for the remaining 2 asserted patents are one query away in Eureka.
Parties of record
LiquidPower Specialty Products, Inc.
- Core tech
- B05D5/08C09K8/588
- Counsel
- Elizabeth Weiswasser
- Firm
- Weil Gotshal & Manages, LLP
Baker Hughes Holdings, LLC
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Herbert D. Hart III
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Elizabeth Weiswasser | LiquidPower Specialty Products, Inc. | Plaintiff |
| Herbert D. Hart III | Baker Hughes Holdings, LLC | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED”
Case 21-2285 · Fed. Cir. · closed 13 April 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 21-2285?
21-2285 is a patent patentability brought by LiquidPower Specialty Products, Inc. against Baker Hughes Holdings, LLC, filed on 8 Sep 2021 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 13 April 2023.
Which patents were asserted in 21-2285?
US8022118B2 (“Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils”), assigned to LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC., currently inactive; US8426498B2 (“Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils”), assigned to LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC., currently inactive; US8450250B2 (“Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils”), assigned to LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC.; US8450249B2 (“Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils”), assigned to LIQUIDPOWER SPECIALTY PRODUCTS, INC.. The record also lists Drag reduction of asphaltenic crude oils.
How was case 21-2285 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is unpatentable. The termination text reads: “THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED”
How long did case 21-2285 take?
582 calendar days, from filing on 8 Sep 2021 to closure on 13 April 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 21-2285?
Elizabeth Weiswasser is recorded as counsel for plaintiff LiquidPower Specialty Products. Herbert D. Hart III appears for defendant Baker Hughes.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 21-2285 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.