Clock Spring, L.P. v. Wrapmaster, Inc.

Clock Spring, LP (plaintiff) was a high-pressure gas-pipeline repair company and the exclusive licensee of a patent covering a method of repairing pipes (the ’307 patent). The ’307 patent contained claim limitations, or specified steps implementing the invention, including a defective pipe having “at least one cavity,” uncured filler material, and the wrapping of a band while the filler material was in an uncured state. In 2005, Clock Spring sued Wrapmaster, Inc. (defendant) for infringing the ’307 patent. Wrapmaster moved for summary judgment based on patent invalidity. One of the asserted grounds for invalidity was prior public use under 35 U.S.C. § 102. The record on summary judgment showed that the application for the ’307 patent was filed in 1992. However, a named inventor, Norman Fawley, had publicly demonstrated the invention in 1989. Several reports documented and described the 1989 demonstration, which had been performed in front of regulators and people in the pipeline industry, to gain feedback and acceptance over the new technology. The demonstration also began training Clock Spring’s personnel. The demonstration was of the entire process of repairing and rehabilitating a working pipeline using Clock Spring’s method and included use of a defective pipe having at least one cavity, uncured filler material, and wrapping of Clock Spring bands while the filler material was in an uncured state. The trial court granted Wrapmaster’s motion for summary judgment on patent invalidity, and Clock Spring appealed. On appeal, Clock Spring argued that the prior public use of its invention did not involve all the claims of the ’307 patent or was an experimental use.