DCT

1:22-cv-00801

Fuel Automation Station LLC v. Permian Global Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 1:22-cv-00801, W.D. Tex., 02/02/2023
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is based on Defendants being incorporated or organized in Texas and having their principal places of business within the state.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ CORE Automated Fueling Solution, a mobile system for refueling hydraulic fracturing equipment, infringes three patents related to automated, multi-hose fluid distribution stations.
  • Technical Context: The technology involves automated "hot-refueling" systems for large-scale industrial operations, designed to eliminate costly downtime and improve operational safety by refueling equipment while it remains running.
  • Key Procedural History: This amended complaint follows an original filing. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Permian Global, Inc. was aware of the asserted patent family as early as December 2019, when it cited the '805 patent in an Information Disclosure Statement (IDS) during its own patent prosecution. Plaintiff also sent demand letters identifying all three asserted patents to Defendants in July 2022.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2016-10-11 Earliest Priority Date ('118, '955, '805 Patents)
2017-03-07 U.S. Patent No. 9,586,805 Issued
2019-01-01 Alleged First Use of Accused Product by Defendant
2019-12-26 Defendant Permian Global Cites '805 Patent in an IDS
2020-10-27 U.S. Patent No. 10,815,118 Issued
2021-04-13 U.S. Patent No. 10,974,955 Issued
2022-07-19 Plaintiff Sends Demand Letters to Defendants
2023-02-02 Amended Complaint Filed

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 10,815,118 - "Mobile Distribution Station Having Sensor Communication Lines Routed With Hoses," issued October 27, 2020

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent identifies the operational inefficiency and cost associated with shutting down hydraulic fracturing equipment for refueling. It notes that "hot-refueling" (refueling while equipment is running) is a solution but can be "difficult to reliably sustain" ('118 Patent, col. 1:12-25).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention is a mobile distribution station, typically on a trailer, that can simultaneously refuel multiple pieces of equipment. A key aspect described in the specification is an improved method for transmitting data from fuel level sensors back to a central controller. To enhance reliability in a harsh industrial environment with potential for wireless interference, the patent discloses routing sensor communication lines directly with the fuel hoses, for example, by placing them between an inner fuel tube and a protective outer sleeve ('118 Patent, col. 5:8-41, Fig. 5). The system uses a controller to automate the refueling process based on sensor feedback ('118 Patent, Abstract).
  • Technical Importance: By hard-wiring sensor communications within the hose assembly, the invention sought to provide more robust and reliable data transmission compared to wireless alternatives, which is critical for the safe and precise automation of hot-refueling operations ('118 Patent, col. 5:1-8).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 ('Compl. ¶41).
  • Essential elements of claim 1 include:
    • a mobile trailer
    • a pump on the mobile trailer
    • a manifold on the mobile trailer and connected with the pump
    • a plurality of reels on the mobile trailer
    • a plurality of flow passages connected to the manifold and running through the reels
    • a plurality of hoses, each connected with a flow passage via a reel
    • a plurality of valves situated between the manifold and a reel to control fluid flow
    • a plurality of fluid level sensors connected or connectable with the hoses
    • a controller configured to operate the valves responsive to fluid level thresholds
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims, but this right is standard practice.

U.S. Patent No. 10,974,955 - "Mobile Distribution Station For Fluid Dispensing," issued April 13, 2021

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: Similar to its related patents, the '955 patent addresses the need for continuous, automated "hot-refueling" to avoid costly shutdowns in hydraulic fracturing operations ('955 Patent, col. 1:20-30).
  • The Patented Solution: This invention focuses on the physical architecture of the mobile station. It describes a system housed within a container that features two distinct manifolds, typically placed on opposite sides. Different sets of hose reels are fed by each manifold, allowing for organized and simultaneous deployment of numerous hoses from both sides of the unit ('955 Patent, Abstract, Fig. 2). A central controller manages the individual valves for each hose based on input from fluid level sensors ('955 Patent, Abstract).
  • Technical Importance: The dual-manifold architecture provides a scalable and organized layout for a high-density mobile fueling station, enabling a single unit to efficiently service a large number of machines on a worksite from either side of the trailer ('955 Patent, col. 3:10-27).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 ('Compl. ¶44).
  • Essential elements of claim 1 include:
    • a container with opposed side and end walls
    • a pump in the container
    • first and second manifolds in the container fluidly connected with the pump
    • a plurality of reels in the container
    • a plurality of hoses, with a portion of reels fed from the first manifold and another portion fed from the second manifold
    • a plurality of valves, each between a manifold and a reel
    • a plurality of fluid level sensors associated with the hoses
    • a controller configured to individually open and close the valves responsive to the sensors
  • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims.

U.S. Patent No. 9,586,805 - "Mobile Distribution Station With Aisle Walkway," issued March 7, 2017

  • Technology Synopsis: This patent addresses the ergonomic and safety aspects of a mobile fueling station. It discloses arranging the hose reels on opposing sides within a mobile trailer to create a dedicated "aisle walkway" down the middle ('805 Patent, Abstract). This configuration provides operators with the necessary space to safely and efficiently move within the trailer to manage the hoses and equipment during operation ('805 Patent, col. 4:41-51).
  • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 ('Compl. ¶47).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges the CORE Automated Fueling Solution includes a mobile trailer with reels arranged on first and second opposed sides and features an "aisle walkway down the middle" ('Compl. ¶17).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The "CORE Automated Fueling Solution" offered by Defendants Manticore Fuels and Permian Global ('Compl. ¶14).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The accused product is a trailer-mounted, automated diesel fueling system designed for hydraulic fracturing operations ('Compl. ¶13). Based on allegations in the complaint and images from Defendants' websites, the system includes a mobile trailer, a pump, a manifold, a plurality of motorized hose reels (26+ reels are advertised), hoses, valves, and a controller that uses "machine learning and real-time data analytics" to manage fueling ('Compl. ¶15, p. 3). One marketing image shows the trailer with numerous hoses extending to service surrounding equipment ('Compl. p. 3, Ex. 1). Another image of the trailer lists features including "26+ custom-built heavy-duty motorized hose reels with over 450 feet of capacity" ('Compl. p. 3, Ex. 2). The complaint alleges Defendants are direct competitors to Plaintiff in the automated frac fuel delivery market ('Compl. ¶13).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references, but does not include, claim chart exhibits. However, it provides narrative paragraphs that track the language of the asserted independent claims for each patent.

  • '118 Patent Infringement Allegations
Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a mobile trailer The solution includes a mobile trailer. ¶15 col. 2:11-12
a pump on the mobile trailer The solution includes a pump on the mobile trailer. ¶15 col. 2:25-26
a manifold on the mobile trailer and connected with the pump The solution includes a manifold on the mobile trailer connected with the pump. ¶15 col. 2:39-40
a plurality of reels on the mobile trailer The solution includes a plurality of reels on the mobile trailer. ¶15 col. 2:45-46
a plurality of flow passages, each said flow passage being connected to the manifold and running through a respective one of the reels The solution includes a plurality of flow passages, each connected to the manifold and running through a reel. ¶15 col. 2:63-67
a plurality of hoses, each said hose being connected with a respective one of the flow passages via a respective one of the reels The solution includes a plurality of hoses, each connected with a flow passage via a reel. ¶15 col. 2:45-49
a plurality of valves on the mobile trailer, each said valve situated between the manifold and a respective different one of the reels and being operable to control fluid flow The solution includes a plurality of valves on the trailer, each situated between the manifold and a reel to control fluid flow. ¶15 col. 2:65-col. 3:4
a plurality of fluid level sensors, each said fluid level sensor being connected or connectable with a respective different one of the hoses The solution includes a plurality of fluid level sensors, each connectable with a hose. ¶15 col. 3:9-15
a controller configured to operate the valves responsive to fluid level thresholds to control fluid flow to the hoses The solution includes a controller configured to operate the valves responsive to fluid level thresholds to control flow. ¶15 col. 3:20-24
  • '955 Patent Infringement Allegations
Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
a container including first and second opposed side walls that join first and second opposed end walls The solution includes a container with first and second opposed side and end walls. ¶16 col. 2:25-29
a pump in the container The solution includes a pump in the container. ¶16 col. 2:50-51
first and second manifolds in the container and fluidly connected with the pump The solution includes first and second manifolds in the container connected with the pump. ¶16 col. 2:63-65
a plurality of reels in the container The solution includes a plurality of reels in the container. ¶16 col. 3:10-12
a plurality of hoses... wherein a portion of the reels are connected to be fed from the first manifold and another portion of the reels are connected to be fed from the second manifold The solution includes a plurality of hoses, with a portion of reels fed from the first manifold and another portion fed from the second manifold. ¶16 col. 9:18-22
a plurality of valves in the container, each said valve situated between one of the first or second manifolds and a respective different one of the reels The solution includes a plurality of valves in the container, each situated between a manifold and a reel. ¶16 col. 9:23-26
a plurality of fluid level sensors, each said fluid level sensor being associated with a different one of the hoses The solution includes a plurality of fluid level sensors, each associated with a different hose. ¶16 col. 9:27-29
a controller configured to individually open and close the valves responsive to the fluid level sensors The solution includes a controller configured to individually open and close the valves responsive to fluid level sensors. ¶16 col. 9:30-33
  • Identified Points of Contention:
    • Scope Questions: For the '955 Patent, a central question may be whether the accused product’s plumbing architecture meets the "first and second manifolds" limitation. The patent figures depict two physically separate tubes ('955 Patent, Fig. 2), raising the question of whether a single, integrated manifold with two main branches would read on the claim.
    • Technical Questions: For the '118 Patent, the complaint’s allegations in paragraph 15 track the general system of independent claim 1. However, the patent’s titled innovation relates to routing sensor lines with the hoses (described in dependent claims 4 and 5). A key question for the court will be whether discovery reveals evidence of this specific feature, which could be relevant to damages or potential assertion of dependent claims.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • Term from '118 Patent: "controller configured to operate the valves responsive to fluid level thresholds"

    • Context and Importance: This functional limitation is central to the automated nature of the invention. Practitioners may focus on this term because its scope will determine the level of automation and specific logic required to infringe. Defendants' marketing of "Artificial Intelligence" and "machine learning" suggests a highly sophisticated controller ('Compl. p. 3, Ex. 1).
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language itself is broad and functional. The specification describes the controller as potentially including a "programmable logic controller with a touchscreen" ('118 Patent, col. 3:24-26), which could be argued to encompass a wide range of modern control systems.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The specification describes specific operational logic, such as sequential refueling, failsafe measures to shut off the pump if a fuel level does not change after a valve is opened, and tracking fuel amounts via a register ('118 Patent, col. 4:4-56). A party could argue the term should be limited to a controller capable of performing these disclosed functions.

  • Term from '955 Patent: "first and second manifolds"

    • Context and Importance: The presence of two distinct manifolds is a core structural element of claim 1 of the '955 Patent, distinguishing it from a system with a single manifold. The infringement analysis for this patent may hinge on whether the accused product's plumbing system satisfies this "first and second" requirement.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the manifolds as "elongated tubes that are generally larger in diameter than the fuel line" ('955 Patent, col. 2:65-col. 3:2), a relatively general description that a party might argue reads on separate branches of a single, complex plumbing apparatus.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The figures, particularly Figure 2, unambiguously depict two physically separate and parallel manifold tubes (38) located on opposite sides of the trailer's central aisle ('955 Patent, Fig. 2). A party could argue that this explicit embodiment defines the required structure and that a single, bifurcated manifold would not meet the limitation.

VI. Other Allegations

  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on both pre- and post-notice knowledge ('Compl. ¶¶ 21-27; Prayer ¶E). The specific facts alleged to support this claim include Defendant Permian Global, Inc.'s citation to the '805 patent (from the same family as the '955 patent) in an IDS filed with the USPTO on December 26, 2019, nearly three years before the initial suit ('Compl. ¶¶ 22-24). The complaint also alleges that Plaintiff provided actual notice of all three asserted patents via demand letters sent on July 19, 2022, and that Defendants continued their infringing activities thereafter ('Compl. ¶¶ 19, 27).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

  • A central issue will be one of claim construction and structural equivalence: can the term "first and second manifolds" as used in the '955 patent, which is depicted in embodiments as two physically separate tubes, be construed to read on the specific plumbing architecture of the accused CORE system, which may utilize a different configuration?
  • A second key question will be one of willfulness and damages: given the allegation that one Defendant cited the parent patent of the '955 patent in its own patent prosecution years before this litigation began, the court will have to determine when Defendants' knowledge of the patented technology arose and whether their continued activities constitute the "objectively reckless" conduct required for a finding of willful infringement.
  • Finally, a primary evidentiary question will be one of factual mapping: while the complaint's narrative allegations closely track the language of the asserted claims, the case will depend on whether the technical evidence produced during discovery confirms that the accused CORE system's components and operation in fact meet each limitation of those claims.