Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company

Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. (MEEC), operating as Birchtech Corp. since October 2024 but proceeding under its former name in this litigation, is an environmental services and technology company. It specializes in proprietary mercury emission control solutions for coal-fired power plants, utilizing its Sorbent Enhancement Additive (SEA) technology. The plaintiff asserts its patents as part of an active enforcement and monetization strategy, having previously secured a $57 million verdict in Delaware for similar technology. The defendant, Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL), is a public utility and a wholly-owned subsidiary of Alliant Energy Corporation, providing electricity and natural gas services in Wisconsin and operating coal-fired facilities. The litigation centers on allegations that WPL's operations infringe MEEC's patents related to methods and materials for capturing mercury pollution in flue gas from coal-fired power plants, specifically involving halogen additives and activated carbon.

The primary patent at issue is US Patent 10668430, which broadly covers "methods and materials for the removal of pollutants from flue gas or product gas from a gasification system," focusing on the removal of mercury from gas streams generated during fossil fuel combustion or gasification using highly reactive regenerable sorbents. It is also described as relating to "System configurations for emission control." The case was initially filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin (3:25-cv-00026) on January 14, 2025. However, it was terminated there on January 30, 2025, and transferred to the Southern District of Iowa for consolidation into Multidistrict Litigation (MDL) No. 3132, titled "IN RE: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. Patent Litigation," presided over by Judge Stephen H. Locher. This transfer to MDL is crucial as it centralizes a broad, multi-defendant patent enforcement campaign by ME2C, aiming to streamline discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings, especially concerning claim construction and patent validity, and conserve judicial and party resources.

This case is notable as it represents a continuation of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp.'s extensive patent enforcement efforts within the emissions control technology sector, particularly against utility companies operating coal-fired power plants. The consolidation into MDL No. 3132 underscores the industry-wide impact of MEEC's patent portfolio, as it brings together numerous similar patent disputes under a single court for coordinated pretrial proceedings. Furthermore, the defensive actions by defendants, such as Wisconsin Power and Light Company's participation in an Inter Partes Review (IPR2025-00423) challenging the '430 patent (though WPL later settled its dispute and was terminated from that IPR), highlight the significant intellectual property battles occurring in the environmental technology space.

Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company, initially filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, was swiftly terminated and consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) concerning mercury emissions control patents. The case, asserting US Patent 10,668,430, is now part of MDL No. 3132 in the Southern District of Iowa.

Here's a chronological breakdown of the key legal developments:

Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• 2025-01-14: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Wisconsin Power and Light Company in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, asserting US Patent 10,668,430.

Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• 2024-12-12: Prior to the filing of this specific case, the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a Transfer Order establishing MDL No. 3132, titled "In re: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. Patent Litigation," in the Southern District of Iowa. This MDL was created to centralize similar patent infringement actions brought by Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. concerning patents related to capturing mercury pollution at coal-fired power plants. The JPML noted that centralization would eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings (especially regarding claim construction and patent validity), and conserve resources. Judge Stephen H. Locher was assigned to the MDL.
• 2025-01-30: The case of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company (3:25-cv-00026) was terminated in the Western District of Wisconsin and transferred to the Southern District of Iowa for consolidation with MDL No. 3132. The transfer was part of the broader consolidation effort for cases involving similar emissions control patent infringement claims.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• IPR2025-00423: Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, Interstate Power & Light Company, MidAmerican Energy Company, PacifiCorp, WEC Energy Group, Inc., and Wisconsin Power & Light Company (collectively, "Petitioners") filed a Petition for inter partes review of claims 1-4 and 6-29 of U.S. Patent No. 10,668,430 B2. This petition directly involves the patent asserted against Wisconsin Power and Light Company in the litigation. Birchtech Corp., formerly known as Midwest Energy Emissions Corp., is the Patent Owner in this IPR. The petition argues that the patent is not time-barred as to certain petitioners. The outcome of this IPR proceeding is pending and could impact the validity of the asserted patent within the MDL.

Outcome:

• The original case in the Western District of Wisconsin concluded with a procedural termination and transfer. There has been no verdict on the substantive issues of patent infringement or patent validity in that district. The litigation against Wisconsin Power and Light Company is now proceeding as part of the broader MDL No. 3132 in the Southern District of Iowa, where coordinated or consolidated pretrial proceedings, including discovery and claim construction, are expected. Specific details regarding subsequent filings, motions, or claim construction within the MDL directly pertaining to Wisconsin Power and Light Company are not publicly detailed outside of the overarching MDL proceedings.Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company, initially filed in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, was promptly transferred and consolidated into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) focused on mercury emissions control patents. The case, asserting US Patent 10,668,430, is now part of MDL No. 3132 in the Southern District of Iowa.

Here's a chronological breakdown of the key legal developments and outcome:

Filing & Initial Pleadings:

• 2025-01-14: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. (ME2C) filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL) in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, asserting US Patent 10,668,430.

Pre-trial Motions of Substance:

• 2024-12-12: The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a Transfer Order establishing MDL No. 3132, titled "In re: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. Patent Litigation," in the Southern District of Iowa. The MDL was created to centralize similar patent infringement actions brought by ME2C concerning patents related to capturing mercury pollution at coal-fired power plants. The JPML cited the need to eliminate duplicative discovery, prevent inconsistent pretrial rulings (especially regarding claim construction and patent validity), and conserve resources. Judge Stephen H. Locher was assigned to oversee the MDL.
• 2025-01-30: The case of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company (3:25-cv-00026) was terminated in the Western District of Wisconsin and transferred to the Southern District of Iowa for consolidation with MDL No. 3132. This transfer was part of the broader effort to centralize related emissions control patent infringement claims.
• 2025-01-31: Wisconsin Power and Light Company, among other defendants, filed a Corporate Disclosure/Statement of Interest in the MDL.
• 2025-01-28: In the MDL, a Case Management Order was issued, directing the parties to meet and confer within fourteen days to prepare a proposed Multidistrict Litigation Case Management Order.
• 2025-05-22: The MDL court denied motions by most defendants, including Wisconsin Power and Light Company, to stay the litigation pending inter partes review (IPR) decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The court indicated it would not impose a stay before the PTAB decided whether to institute review proceedings. The court also denied defendants' joint motion to compel supplemental infringement contentions and a joint motion to extend the deadline for invalidity contentions, finding ME2C's initial infringement contentions sufficient.

Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• IPR2025-00423: Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, Interstate Power & Light Company, MidAmerican Energy Company, PacifiCorp, WEC Energy Group, Inc., and Wisconsin Power & Light Company (collectively, "Petitioners") filed a Petition for inter partes review of claims 1-4 and 6-29 of U.S. Patent No. 10,668,430 B2. Birchtech Corp., formerly known as Midwest Energy Emissions Corp., is the Patent Owner in this IPR. This IPR directly challenges the patent asserted against Wisconsin Power and Light Company in the litigation.
• Various IPRs (January - April 2025): Wisconsin Power and Light Company, along with MidAmerican, PacifiCorp, and Interstate Power and Light Company, filed petitions for inter partes review of all six patents asserted in the MDL, beginning with the '114 Patent on January 17, 2025, and concluding with the '218 Patent on April 8, 2025. Petitions relating to the other four patents, including the '430 patent, were filed at roughly two-week intervals.

Outcome:

• The original case in the Western District of Wisconsin was procedurally terminated and transferred to MDL No. 3132. There has been no verdict on the substantive issues of patent infringement or patent validity in that district. The litigation against Wisconsin Power and Light Company is now part of the coordinated pretrial proceedings in MDL No. 3132 in the Southern District of Iowa. The MDL court has denied a motion to stay pending IPR institution decisions, indicating active progression of the litigation. The status of the IPR proceedings related to the asserted patents will continue to be a significant factor influencing the course of the MDL.## Legal Developments and Outcome in Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company

The patent infringement litigation initiated by Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. (ME2C) against Wisconsin Power and Light Company (WPL), asserting US Patent 10,668,430, saw an early procedural termination and subsequent consolidation into a multidistrict litigation (MDL) focused on mercury emissions control technology.

Key Legal Developments:

1. Filing & Initial Pleadings (Western District of Wisconsin):

• 2025-01-14: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. filed a patent infringement lawsuit against Wisconsin Power and Light Company in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Wisconsin, asserting U.S. Patent No. 10,668,430.

2. Pre-trial Motions of Substance (MDL Transfer & Proceedings):

• 2024-12-12: The United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML) issued a Transfer Order establishing MDL No. 3132, "In re: Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. Patent Litigation," in the Southern District of Iowa. The purpose of this MDL was to centralize similar patent infringement actions filed by ME2C, involving patents related to mercury pollution control at coal-fired power plants. The JPML highlighted the benefits of centralization, including eliminating duplicative discovery, preventing inconsistent pretrial rulings (particularly concerning claim construction and patent validity), and conserving judicial and party resources. Judge Stephen H. Locher was assigned to preside over the MDL.
• 2025-01-30: The case of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company (3:25-cv-00026) was terminated in the Western District of Wisconsin and formally transferred to the Southern District of Iowa for consolidation into MDL No. 3132.
• 2025-01-31: Wisconsin Power and Light Company, alongside other defendants, filed a Corporate Disclosure/Statement of Interest in the MDL.
• 2025-01-28: A Case Management Order was issued in the MDL, directing the parties to meet and confer within fourteen days to formulate a proposed Multidistrict Litigation Case Management Order.
• 2025-05-22: The MDL court denied motions to stay the litigation, filed by most defendants including Wisconsin Power and Light Company, pending institution decisions from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) on inter partes reviews (IPRs). The court clarified it would not grant a stay before the PTAB decided whether to institute the review proceedings. Additionally, the court denied the defendants' joint motion to compel supplemental infringement contentions and their joint motion to extend the deadline for invalidity contentions, finding ME2C's initial infringement contentions to be sufficient.

3. Parallel PTAB IPR/PGR Proceedings:

• IPR2025-00423: Wisconsin Power & Light Company, along with Berkshire Hathaway Energy Company, Interstate Power & Light Company, MidAmerican Energy Company, PacifiCorp, and WEC Energy Group, Inc., filed a Petition for inter partes review of claims 1-4 and 6-29 of U.S. Patent No. 10,668,430 B2. Birchtech Corp. (formerly Midwest Energy Emissions Corp.) is the Patent Owner in this IPR.
• January - April 2025: Wisconsin Power and Light Company, in concert with MidAmerican, PacifiCorp, and Interstate Power and Light Company, filed multiple petitions for inter partes review challenging all six patents asserted in the MDL. These petitions began with the '114 Patent on January 17, 2025, and concluded with the '218 Patent on April 8, 2025, with petitions for the other four patents, including the '430 patent, filed at approximately two-week intervals.

Outcome:

The individual case of Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company in the Western District of Wisconsin concluded with a procedural termination and transfer to MDL No. 3132. There was no merits-based verdict on patent infringement or validity in the initial district court. The litigation against Wisconsin Power and Light Company is now subsumed within the coordinated pretrial proceedings of MDL No. 3132 in the Southern District of Iowa. The MDL court has indicated a proactive stance, denying motions to stay based on pending IPRs, suggesting the litigation will continue to advance through the pretrial phase. The ongoing IPR proceedings at the PTAB, which challenge the validity of the asserted patents, remain a significant parallel development that could influence the ultimate disposition of the consolidated litigation.

Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. is represented by a combination of lead trial counsel and local counsel in its patent infringement cases, including Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company. The plaintiff's counsel includes:

Lead Counsel (for broader patent enforcement efforts and likely in the MDL):

• Bradley Wayne Caldwell - Lead Trial Counsel
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Served as lead trial counsel for Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. in a Delaware patent infringement case, securing a $57 million verdict related to mercury-capture technology. The firm has represented Midwest Energy as licensing and trial counsel since 2018.
• Justin Thomas Nemunaitis - Attorney
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Presented witnesses at trial in a Delaware patent infringement case for Midwest Energy.
• Daniel Pearson - Attorney
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Presented witnesses at trial in a Delaware patent infringement case for Midwest Energy.
• Adrienne Dellinger - Attorney
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Played a vital role for the trial team in a Delaware patent infringement case for Midwest Energy.
• Aisha Mahmood Haley - Attorney
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Played a vital role for the trial team in a Delaware patent infringement case for Midwest Energy.
• Richard A. Cochrane - Attorney
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)
  • Note: Played a vital role for the trial team in a Delaware patent infringement case for Midwest Energy.
• Austin Curry - Attorney
  • Firm: Caldwell Cassady & Curry, PC (Dallas, TX)

Local Counsel (for initial Wisconsin filing):

• Jeffrey D. Harty - Attorney
  • Firm: Nyemaster Goode, P.C.
  • Note: Appears as counsel for Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. in the Western District of Wisconsin case. Also filed an amended complaint in a related case that was transferred to the Southern District of Iowa MDL.

Liaison Counsel (in the MDL context):

While "Liaison Counsel for Plaintiffs" is mentioned in the MDL transfer order, specific names were not identified in the search results as solely liaison counsel for the plaintiff side. However, Robert M. Evans, Jr. and Richard Bennett Walsh, Jr. are listed as representing Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. in the MDL, suggesting a role in coordinating the litigation.

• Robert M. Evans, Jr. - Attorney
  • Firm: Not specified in search results directly for this role, but he appears for Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. in the MDL.
• Richard Bennett Walsh, Jr. - Attorney
  • Firm: Not specified in search results directly for this role, but he appears for Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. in the MDL.

Here is the counsel of record representing Wisconsin Power and Light Company in Midwest Energy Emissions Corp. v. Wisconsin Power and Light Company, Case No. 3:25-cv-00026, which was subsequently transferred to MDL No. 3132 in the Southern District of Iowa:

For Defendant Wisconsin Power and Light Company:

• Michelle M. Kemp

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP
  • Office Location: While not explicitly stated in the provided snippets, Perkins Coie has multiple offices. Further research would be needed to pinpoint her specific office for this case.
  • Relevant Experience: Michelle Kemp is listed as counsel for several defendants in the MDL, including Wisconsin Power and Light Company and other entities within the Alliant Energy Corporate Services group. She also filed a corporate disclosure statement for Alliant Energy Corporate Services, Inc. in a related case.

• Brianna Kadjo

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP
  • Office Location: Further research would be needed to pinpoint her specific office.
  • Relevant Experience: Brianna Kadjo is listed as counsel for Wisconsin Power and Light Company.

• Gabrielle E. Bina

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP
  • Office Location: Further research would be needed to pinpoint her specific office.
  • Relevant Experience: Gabrielle Bina is listed as counsel for Wisconsin Power and Light Company and other related entities.

• Andrew Kalamarides

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Perkins Coie LLP
  • Office Location: Further research would be needed to pinpoint his specific office.
  • Relevant Experience: Andrew Kalamarides is listed as counsel for Wisconsin Power and Light Company.

• Tara Z. Hall

  • Role: Counsel
  • Firm: Dentons Davis Brown PC
  • Office Location: Further research would be needed to pinpoint her specific office.
  • Relevant Experience: Tara Hall is listed as counsel for Wisconsin Power and Light Company.

The above attorneys were identified from PacerMonitor listings for the original Western District of Wisconsin case (3:25-cv-00026) and a related case transferred to the MDL (2:25-cv-00015), where Wisconsin Power and Light Company was also a named defendant. The case in the Western District of Wisconsin was terminated and transferred to MDL No. 3132 on January 30, 2025.