US Court of Appeals Rules in Favor of US Synthetic Corporation in ITC Case
THE WOODLANDS, Texas, Feb. 17, 2025 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- ChampionX Corporation (NASDAQ: CHX) ('ChampionX') noted today that its US Synthetic Corp., a leading provider of polycrystalline diamond cutters for oil and gas drilling, has secured a significant legal victory as the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) reversing a prior International Trade Commission (ITC) determination that had deemed the company's patent claims ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
The case, involving U.S. Patent No. 10508502, pertains to a polycrystalline diamond compact (PDC) used in rotary drill bits, which exhibits superior diamond to diamond bonding. The ITC had initially ruled that the patent's claims were directed to an abstract idea, arguing that the disclosed magnetic properties were merely side effects of the manufacturing process rather than physical characteristics of the compound. However, the Federal Circuit disagreed, finding that the claims described a specific composition of matter and not an abstract idea, reinforcing that the magnetic properties provide meaningful insights into the PDC's physical characteristics.
'We are extremely pleased with the Federal Circuit's decision, which reaffirms the validity of our patent and the importance of our innovation,' said Rob Galloway, President at US Synthetic. 'This ruling not only protects our intellectual property but also underscores the significance of our technology in advancing drilling performance and efficiency.'
About US Synthetic
US Synthetic, which is the Drilling Technologies segment of ChampionX, offers innovative, top-quality polycrystalline diamond cutters ('PDC'), bearings, valves, and mining tools to help customers drill the world's most demanding oil exploration and development projects, and for use in other industries. These highly specialized products are developed and produced based on more than 40 years of innovation and intellectual property development in material science applications.
About ChampionX
ChampionX is a global leader in chemistry solutions, artificial lift systems, and highly engineered equipment and technologies that help companies drill for and produce oil and gas safely, efficiently, and sustainably around the world. ChampionX's expertise, innovative products, and digital technologies provide enhanced oil and gas production, transportation, and real-time emissions monitoring throughout the lifecycle of a well. To learn more about ChampionX, visit our website at www.championX.com.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Court decides to expedite Oregon's lawsuit challenging Trump's tariffs
PORTLAND, Ore. (KOIN) – A federal court issued an order on Wednesday to fast-track Oregon's lawsuit challenging tariffs imposed by the Trump administration. The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ordered to expedite the lawsuit, which was filed in late April in the Court of International Trade in New York. Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield welcomed the decision stating, 'We're glad the court recognizes how important this case is by moving it forward quickly.' Investigators believe they spotted Travis Decker hiking in Washington. Here's what to know 'These tariffs are illegal—and they're hurting people. They've driven up costs on everyday goods, making it harder for families and small businesses to make ends meet. One analysis found the added cost is more than $3,800 a month. That's just not sustainable,' Rayfield said. The attorney general noted the order to expedite the lawsuit is only procedural noting, 'This order doesn't address whether the tariffs are legal. So far, every federal judge who's looked at the legality of these tariffs has ruled against them—and we believe the law is on our side.' The lawsuit argues that the president does not have the authority to unilaterally impose tariffs, rather, Congress has the power to enact tariffs under Article I of the Constitution. Esquire names Portland bar among the best in the U.S. in 2025 While President Trump's executive orders state the president has the authority to impose tariffs under the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act, Attorney General Rayfield argues that law only applies in an emergency with an 'unusual and extraordinary' threat from abroad and does not give the president the power to impose tariffs. The lawsuit is co-led by Oregon Attorney General Dan Rayfield and Arizona Attorney General Kris Mayes. Other states joining the suit include Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, Minnesota, Nevada, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont. The order to expedite the lawsuit comes after Rayfield celebrated a brief legal victory on May 29 when a three-judge panel on the U.S. Court of International Trade temporarily blocked tariffs Trump imposed against all U.S. trading partners as well as levies he imposed before that on China, Mexico and Canada. Close Thanks for signing up! Watch for us in your inbox. Subscribe Now In a briefing, White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt called the ruling 'judicial overreach' and stressed the need for the Supreme Court to intervene. 'There is a troubling and dangerous trend of unelected judges inserting themselves into the presidential decision-making process,' she said. 'America cannot function if President Trump, or any other president for that matter, has their sensitive diplomatic or trade negotiations railroaded by activist judges.' Soon after, however, the Trump administration was granted an appeal to that decision in the U.S. Court of Appeals — upending the lower court's ruling to halt tariffs. KOIN 6 News has reached out to the United States Attorney General's Office. This story will be updated if we receive a response. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Business of Fashion
a day ago
- Business of Fashion
Trump Tariffs Can Stay in Effect Longer, Appeals Court Says
Donald Trump can continue to enforce his global tariffs for now, a federal appeals court held in a win for the president on one of his signature economic policies. The order Tuesday by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit extends an earlier, short-term reprieve for the administration as it presses a challenge to a lower court ruling last month that blocked the tariffs. The Justice Department had argued that US officials' concerns about ongoing trade negotiations outweighed the economic harm claimed by the small businesses that sued. The Washington-based court put the case on an expedited track, citing the 'issues of exceptional importance' at stake, and scheduled arguments for July 31. The court didn't offer a detailed reason for siding with the administration at this stage, indicating in the order that the government had met its burden for showing that keeping the lower court's injunction on hold was 'warranted.' No judge noted a dissent. The ruling comes as negotiators for the US and China reached a preliminary agreement to de-escalate trade tensions. Representatives of the world's two largest economies announced the accord in the second day of talks in London over exports of key tech and industrial goods. Trump has portrayed tariffs as critical to leveling the playing field for American businesses and workers amid chronic trade deficits. Trade Court The Trump administration asked the appeals court to step in after the US Court of International Trade last month ruled that Trump had misused an emergency law to implement the tariffs. Unless the challengers request swift intervention by the US Supreme Court, the levies will stay in place for at least another month, if not longer, as the rest of the legal fight plays out before the Washington-based appellate court. Whoever loses the next round of the case before the Federal Circuit could then ask the high court justices to weigh in. Tuesday's order comes a month before Trump's own 90-day pause on most of his sweeping 'reciprocal' tariffs is set to expire. On July 9, US tariff rates are set to increase drastically for many nations, absent trade deals or a further extension. Goods from the European Union, for instance, are facing a 50 percent levy. Companies led by New York wine importer V.O.S. Selections Inc. claimed that letting the tariffs go into effect would lead to much higher costs and lower sales, with some of them likely to end up in bankruptcy. The administration argued that blocking the tariffs would disrupt US diplomacy and intrude upon the president's power to conduct foreign affairs. A dozen Democratic-led states also sued the administration over the tariffs. Jeffrey Schwab, senior counsel and director of litigation at the Liberty Justice Center, which represents the private plaintiffs, said in a statement that they were disappointed but glad the Federal Circuit set a fast schedule and would have the full court hear the fight over Trump's use of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. 'It's important to note that every court to rule on the merits so far has found these tariffs unlawful, and we have faith that this court will likewise see what is plain as day: that IEEPA does not allow the president to impose whatever tax he wants whenever he wants,' Schwab said. A White House spokesperson and a representative of the Oregon attorney general's office, which led the state coalition that sued, did not immediately respond to requests for comment. 'Liberation Day' Tariffs covered by the trade court ruling include Trump's global 10 percent levy, his April 2 'Liberation Day' tariffs and measures targeting China, Canada and Mexico over fentanyl trafficking. The president claimed authority to impose those tariffs under the 1977 emergency economic powers law. A three-judge panel of the trade court ruled last month that law didn't give the president unbridled tariff power. The court also took issue with Trump's claims of 'emergencies' over trade deficits and drug-trafficking. In their decision, the judges said government lawyers actually undercut that position by arguing that tariffs were needed as negotiating tools. 'The government's 'pressure' argument effectively concedes that the direct effect of the country-specific tariffs is simply to burden the countries they target,' wrote the panel, which includes judges appointed by Trump, Barack Obama and Ronald Reagan. Trump's tariffs on steel, aluminium and automobiles were imposed under a different law, so were not affected by the trade court ruling. Administration officials have often publicly downplayed the impact of the May 28 decision by claiming that most of its tariffs can be imposed by other means. Global markets have fluctuated wildly since Trump announced the so-called reciprocal levies in a sweeping executive order on April 2. Since then, trillions of dollars in market value have been shed and regained amid weeks of delays, reversals and announcements about potential trade deals, particularly with China. The case is V.O.S. Selections v. Trump, 25-1812, US Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit. By Zoe Tillman and Erik Larson Learn more: Why Tariffs Haven't Led to Soaring Prices – Yet Fashion brands will eventually need to offset higher costs for imports. But after raising prices again and again since the pandemic, some retailers are more worried about alienating shoppers than how they'll pay their customs duties.
Fast Company
a day ago
- Fast Company
Appeals court sides with Trump, allows tariffs to stay in place
A federal appeals court agreed Tuesday to let the government keep collecting President Donald Trump's sweeping import taxes while challenges to his signature trade policy continue on appeal. The decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit extends a similar ruling it made after another federal court struck down the tariffs May 28, saying Trump had overstepped his authority. Noting that the challenges to Trump's tariffs raise 'issues of exceptional importance,' the appeals court said it would expedite the case and hear arguments July 31. The case involves 10% tariffs the president imposed on almost every country in April and bigger ones he imposed and then suspended on countries with which the United States runs trade deficits. It also involves tariffs Trump plastered on imports from China, Canada and Mexico to pressure them to do more to stop the illegal flow of immigrants and synthetic opioids across the U.S. border. In declaring the tariffs, Trump had invoked emergency powers under a 1977 law. But a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of International Trade ruled he had exceeded his power.
