US Well Services, LLC et al. v. Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.
Patentability filed 6 Apr 2023 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 20 Jul 2023, with US9893500B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: voluntary dismissal.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US9893500B2
- Application no.
- US15/487694
- Case no.
- 23-1706
- 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
- 6 Apr 2023 – 20 Jul 2023
- Duration
- 105 days
- Basis of termination
- Voluntary dismissal
- Products & marks
- Switchgear load sharing for oil field equipment
- Validity challenges
- 2 on record
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
Switchgear load sharing for oil field equipment
A hydraulic fracturing system for fracturing a subterranean formation is disclosed. In an embodiment, the system may include a plurality of electric pumps fluidly connected to a well associated with the subterranean formation and powered by at least one electric motor, and configured to pump fluid into a wellbore associated with the well at a high pressure so that the fluid passes from the wellbore into the subterranean formation and fractures the subterranean formation; at least one generator electrically coupled to the plurality of electric pumps so as to generate electricity for use by the plurality of electric pumps; and at least one switchgear electrically coupled to the at least one generator and configured to distribute an electrical load between the plurality of electric pumps and the at least one generator.
- Legal status
- Active
- Granted
- 13 Feb 2018
- Earliest priority
- 15 Apr 2016
- Est. expiry
- 16 Nov 2032
- Validity challenges
- 2 on recordIPR2021-01315 · Patentability · filed by Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.IPR2021-01315 · Patentability · filed by HALLIBURTON ENERGY SERVICES, INC
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- OEHRING, JARED · HINDERLITER, BRANDON N.
- Classification
- E21B43/26F04B23/04F04B35/04F04B17/03E21B41/00H02B7/06H02B13/00H02J11/00F04B47/02F02C3/22F04B49/20
- Prosecution counsel
- Abel Schillinger, LLP
- Examiner
- THOMPSON, KENNETH L
Parties of record
US Well Services, LLC
- Core tech
- E21B43/26F04B23/04F04B35/04F04B17/03
- Counsel
- Matthew James Dowd · Robert James Scheffel
- Firm
- Dowd Scheffel PLLC
- Also named
- ProFrac Holding, Corp.
Halliburton Energy Services, Inc.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Chad C. Walters · Clarke Stavinoha · Lori Ding · Michael Hawes · Roger Fulghum
- Firm
- Baker Botts LLP
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Matthew James Dowd | US Well Services, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Robert James Scheffel | US Well Services, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Chad C. Walters | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | Defendant |
| Clarke Stavinoha | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | Defendant |
| Lori Ding | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | Defendant |
| Michael Hawes | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | Defendant |
| Roger Fulghum | Halliburton Energy Services, Inc. | Defendant |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b). (2) Each side shall bear their own costs”
Case 23-1706 · Fed. Cir. · closed 20 July 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 23-1706?
23-1706 is a patent patentability brought by US Well Services, LLC against Halliburton Energy Services, Inc., filed on 6 Apr 2023 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 20 July 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 23-1706?
US9893500B2 (“Switchgear load sharing for oil field equipment”), assigned to US WELL SERVICES LLC, currently active. The record also lists Switchgear load sharing for oil field equipment.
How was case 23-1706 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is voluntary dismissal. The termination text reads: “The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. P. 42 (b). (2) Each side shall bear their own costs”
What does voluntary dismissal mean?
A voluntary dismissal is one the plaintiff asks for rather than one the court imposes. Where both sides stipulate to it, it commonly signals a settlement that is not filed on the public docket.
How long did case 23-1706 take?
105 calendar days, from filing on 6 Apr 2023 to closure on 20 July 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 23-1706?
Matthew James Dowd and Robert James Scheffel are recorded as counsel for plaintiff US Well Services. Chad C. Walters, Clarke Stavinoha, Lori Ding, Michael Hawes and Roger Fulghum appear for defendant Halliburton Energy Services.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 23-1706 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.