Scientific Drilling International, Inc. v. Gunnar Lllp

This case involves a Post-Grant Review (PGR) petition filed by Scientific Drilling International, Inc. against Gunnar Lllp before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Scientific Drilling International, Inc. is a global operating company specializing in independent services such as directional drilling, wellbore navigation, surveying, and logging for clients in the oil & gas, geothermal, and mining industries. They are known for designing, engineering, and manufacturing their own advanced directional drilling technology products. The Patent Owner, Gunnar Lllp, is likely related to Gunnar Energy Services, an operating company providing precise wellbore placement, active magnetic ranging, and relief well solutions across the oil & gas, carbon capture, utilization and sequestration (CCUS), solution mining, and geothermal sectors. Gunnar Energy Services highlights its reliance on patented state-of-the-art technology. Notably, the founder of Gunnar, Clinton Moss, previously founded Marksman Ranging Technologies, which was sold to Scientific Drilling, indicating a history of competitive and transactional interactions between the parties or their principals.

The patent at issue in this PGR is US Patent 12110780. Despite multiple attempts to locate its title and a technical sketch through standard patent search databases like Google Patents using the provided patent number, the specific details for US Patent 12110780 are not readily discoverable or publicly available under that exact numerical identifier. Therefore, a one-line technical sketch cannot be provided based on the available search results. The PGR proceeding was initiated to challenge the patentability of the claims of this patent.

The procedural posture of this case is a Post-Grant Review (PGR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), under case number PGR2025-00061, filed on August 19, 2025. The PTAB ultimately issued a "Not Instituted - Merits" decision, meaning the Board declined to proceed with the trial because the petitioner, Scientific Drilling, did not demonstrate a reasonable likelihood of prevailing on at least one of the challenged claims. This outcome is particularly notable given the significant procedural changes at the PTAB around the time of this filing and decision, including the USPTO Director's increased and direct involvement in institution decisions, encompassing both discretionary and merits-based evaluations, which became effective in October 2025. This period saw a shift in PTAB practice aimed at improving efficiency and promoting consistent application of discretionary considerations, making it materially harder to institute IPRs and PGRs. The case highlights the intense competition within the specialized and technologically advanced wellbore placement and navigation industry, where intellectual property plays a critical role.

The case you've provided, PGR2025-00061, is a Post-Grant Review (PGR) proceeding before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), not a district court patent infringement litigation. PGRs are administrative proceedings challenging the validity of a patent, distinct from a lawsuit for patent infringement in a federal court.

Here are the key developments for the provided PGR:

PGR2025-00061: Scientific Drilling International, Inc. v. Gunnar Lllp

• Patents at issue: U.S. Patent No. 12,110,780.
• Filing Date: The petition was filed on 2025-08-19.
• Outcome: The petition for Post-Grant Review was not instituted on the merits. This means the PTAB declined to proceed with a full review of the patent's validity.

Parallel Patent Infringement Litigation

A search for parallel district court patent infringement litigation involving U.S. Patent No. 12,110,780 and the parties Scientific Drilling International, Inc. and Gunnar Lllp did not yield any immediate public results indicating an ongoing or concluded infringement lawsuit between these specific parties regarding this patent. Without a specific district court case number, it is not possible to provide details on complaint filings, pre-trial motions, claim construction, discovery, trial events, or final disposition for such litigation.

Therefore, the requested details regarding patent infringement litigation are not applicable to PGR2025-00061 itself, and no parallel district court litigation matching the specified parties and patent could be identified in the conducted search.

Unfortunately, the publicly available web search results do not directly identify the specific counsel of record representing Scientific Drilling International, Inc. in PGR2025-00061.

While Scientific Drilling International, Inc. has an in-house Senior Vice President & General Counsel, Dan Carter, with extensive experience in the energy sector and legal leadership roles, his direct involvement as counsel of record for this specific PTAB case is not confirmed by the search results. Dan Carter graduated from Louisiana Tech University with degrees in Chemical Engineering and Political Science and earned his Doctor of Jurisprudence from South Texas College of Law. He has over 35 years of experience in the energy sector.

Firms like Studebaker Brackett PLLC specialize in patent prosecution and post-grant proceedings and have experience in technologies relevant to drilling and mechanical devices, but there is no direct link establishing them as counsel for Scientific Drilling International, Inc. in PGR2025-00061 from the provided search results. The USPTO's Open Data Portal typically lists attorney and agent information for PTAB cases, often associated with a Customer Number in "Power of Attorney" documents. However, a direct document or listing for PGR2025-00061 detailing the petitioner's counsel was not found through the performed searches.

Therefore, the counsel of record for Scientific Drilling International, Inc. in PGR2025-00061 is not explicitly identified in the provided information.

Based on available public information, the counsel of record representing the defendant, Gunnar Lllp, in PGR2025-00061 are likely from Troutman Pepper Locke.

• Gunnar G. Leinberg

  • Role: Lead Counsel (inferred)
  • Firm: Troutman Pepper Locke, Rochester, NY
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Gunnar G. Leinberg is a partner at Troutman Pepper Locke with extensive experience in intellectual property litigation and post-grant administrative proceedings, including inter partes reviews (IPRs) and post-grant opposition practice. He is regularly involved in overseeing the development, management, enforcement, and defense of intellectual property portfolios for clients and frequently speaks on topics related to post-grant administrative proceedings. His technical experience spans software, data communications, electronics, optics, autonomous vehicles, medical devices, and robotics. He has been recognized in Best Lawyers in America for Litigation – Intellectual Property and Litigation – Patent from 2018-2026.

• Nicholas J. Gallo

  • Role: Back-up Counsel (inferred)
  • Firm: Troutman Pepper Locke, Rochester, NY
  • Relevant Patent Litigation Experience: Nicholas J. Gallo frequently appears as "First Back-up Counsel" alongside Gunnar G. Leinberg in Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) proceedings, including IPRs, where their firm represents Patent Owners. This indicates his active involvement and experience in post-grant administrative proceedings.

Note: While Gunnar G. Leinberg and Nicholas J. Gallo of Troutman Pepper Locke have a strong record and relevant expertise in PTAB cases defending patent owners, a direct docket entry explicitly confirming their appearance as counsel for Gunnar Lllp in PGR2025-00061 was not explicitly found through web search. The identification of counsel is based on their demonstrated roles in similar PTAB proceedings where Troutman Pepper Locke represented patent owners.