Invalidity dossier

US 6585061

Calculating directional drilling tool face offsets

Current assignee: Weatherford Technology Holdings LLC

Added 9/21/2026, 10:19:43 AM

At a glanceNo PTAB challengesNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.

✓ Generated

Patent Overview — US 6,585,061 B2

Title: Calculating directional drilling tool face offsets

Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US6585061/en

Bibliographic data (from supplied text): Application US09/976,129; priority/filing date 2001-10-15; publication date 2003-07-01; legal status "Expired – Lifetime" (anticipated expiration 2021-10-15). Inventors: Paul E. Radzinski, Michael L. Larronde, Jian-qun Wu. Original assignee: Precision Drilling Technology Services Group Inc.; current assignee listed as Weatherford Technology Holdings LLC. Other versions: US20030070844A1; GB2381022B; CA2407541C. Classification: E21B7/067 (adjustable bent sub).

Purpose: The invention relates generally to directional drilling of wells and, in particular, to a method and apparatus for "more efficient and accurate determination of an angular offset between a directional sensor reference point and the high side of a bent sub." One stated object is to eliminate error that may be made in measuring and applying the angular difference used to determine bent sub orientation, and to implement equipment for achieving same.

Plain-language scope: In directional drilling, a downhole motor assembly includes a bent sub that offsets the bit a slight angle (usually about three degrees) from the drill string axis. To steer, the operator must know the bent sub's orientation, derived from the directional sensor tool face plus a "tool face offset"—the angular difference between the sensor reference point and the bent sub. Conventional practice uses a scribe line and a chalk line measured with a protractor, requiring the operator to decide whether to add or subtract the difference. In the described approach, a locater (e.g., a circumferential groove) marks the approximate midpoint of the magnetometer in the instrument housing; the tools are suspended vertically; a chalk line is drawn from the bent sub high side to that groove; and magnetic field measurements ("B before") are taken via a probe and electrical lead to the surface instrument panel.

What the excerpt does not establish: It is truncated ("[Excerpt only; consult the source for omitted text.]"). It does not provide the full claims, the complete measurement/computation method, how the offset is finally calculated, any drawings' content, or the remaining description. No litigation, ownership-transfer analysis, validity, or prior-art assessment is made here.

Generated 10/1/2026, 10:01:49 PM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6585061. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Proceedings on file (0)

All PTAB activity →

AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.

PTAB challenges

AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Assignment history

Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.