Pour The

Oliver Rocha Gonzalez v. EOG Res., Inc. et al.

B&L was retained by the manufacturer of oil and gas pipeline equipment that was involved in a serious accident where a worker suffered injuries which required him to be life-flight evacuated to a nearby hospital.  Prior to any testing of the equipment, retention of expert witnesses or deposition of our client, B&L was able to promptly resolve the dispute to the satisfaction of our client.

See Cause No. 2022-48108, 125^th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas.

Nabors Drilling Technologies USA, Inc. v. C&M Oilfield Rentals, LLC d/b/a C-MOR Energy Services

On March 29, 2024, B&L defeated the global law firm of Morgan Lewis when B&L secured a victory for client Nabors in a patent infringement and breach of contract lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Alfred H. Bennet granted B&L’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(c) Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings and held C&M’s asserted patent-in-suit, U.S. Patent No. 11,300,260, was invalid as anticipated (post-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(a)(1)) by C&M’s own parent patents.  Judge Bennet also dismissed C&M’s asserted breach of contract claims that had been asserted against B&L’s client Nabors.  This case further shows how B&L’s boutique efficiency can will the day with the firm’s two lawyers besting the oppositions large team of litigators.

See Civil Action No. 4:22-cv-02140 (ECF No. 107), United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division.

Auto-Dril, Inc. v. National Oilwell Varco, L.P.

On January 8, 2024, B&L prevailed against the combined firms of Gray Reed and Nix Patterson, LLP in a fraud and fraudulent inducement lawsuit where Auto-Dril was seeking over $12 million in damages from B&L’s client NOV.  B&L obtained a FINAL JUDGMENT against all of Auto-Dril’s claims and a dismissal of the case with prejudice following extensive briefing and a hearing on Auto-Dril’s motions for reconsideration of Court’s summary judgment ruling in NOV’s favor.

See Cause No. 2023-40833, 61^st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas.

Kevin Johnson v. Recoil Energy Sys., LLC & National Oilwell Varco, L.P.

B&L successfully defended NOV against plaintiff Johnson’s product liability claims relating to NOV’s top drive system where plaintiff sought damages of over $1,000,000.00.

B&L quickly filed and prevailed on their Tex R Civ Pro 91a.1 Motion to Dismiss Johnson’s asserted products and personal injury claims against NOV.

See Cause No. 2022-16309, 127^th Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas.         

Kerry Brown & Krushial K. Productions v. Roc Nation, Sony Music Entertainment Digital LLC et al.

B&L aggressively pressed plaintiffs’ counsel to dismiss their music copyright infringement lawsuit against B&L’s client Sony Music.  Plaintiffs asserted that Sony Music distributed rapper A$AP Ferg’s song “Plain Jane,” which allegedly included plaintiffs’ copyrighted work.  Shortly after B&L’s designated sound recording expert analyzed plaintiffs’ copyrighted work and compared it to the song “Plain Jane,” plaintiffs promptly dismissed their lawsuit following a hearing on B&L’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss.

See Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-01508, In the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division (ECF Nos. 29-32).

Auto-Dril, Inc. v. National Oilwell Varco, L.P.

B&L developed the winning argument that knocked this $12 million fraud case out of court before B&L’s client NOV was even required to participate in discovery.

Plaintiff Auto-Dril filed suit against B&L client NOV on July 3, 2023, for fraud and fraudulent inducement, and sought more than $12 million in damages from NOV.  Within a few weeks of being served with this lawsuit and before any discovery had been taken, B&L promptly prepared and filed a Tex. R. Civ. P. 166(a) motion for summary judgment (September 5, 2023) arguing that Auto-Dril’s claims of fraud were fundamentally flawed and set its motion for submission at the Court’s earliest available setting.  District Judge Fredericka Phillips agreed, unconditionally dismissing Auto-Dril’s lawsuit with prejudice and entering a Final Judgment within 90 days of NOV being served with this lawsuit.

See Cause No. 2023-40833, 61^st Judicial District Court of Harris County, Texas.

Dynamic Real Estate Analytics, LLC v. David Vicent Odine

B&L successfully defended Odine in more than $1,000,000.00 lawsuit alleging breach of fiduciary duty, breach of contract, Texas Theft Liability Act (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134), conversion, and Texas Uniform Trade Secrets Act (Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code § 134A).

B&L’s brilliant and aggressive Tex. R. Civ. P. 12 motion to show authority resulted in all of plaintiff’s claims being dismissed with prejudice.      

See Cause No. 366-05476-2022, 366^th Judicial District Court of Collin County, Texas (Order (9-18-2023)).

National Oilwell Varco, L.P. v. Auto-Dril, Inc.

B&L prevailed at the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on behalf of client NOV, following a successful 2021 jury trial.  This victory paved the way for NOV to proceed back in district court to collect from Auto-Dril the unpaid balance due under the 2011 Settlement Agreement.

The Fifth Circuit held that the District Court lacked jurisdiction over defendant Auto-Dril’s fraud and fraudulent inducement counterclaims.  The Fifth Circuit further held that the District Court had twice abused his discretion, and reinstated NOV’s breach of contract claims against Auto-Dril for failure to pay the full settlement amount.

See National Oilwell Varco, L.P. vs. Auto-Dril, Inc., 68 F.4^th 206 (5^th Cir. 2023).

National Oilwell Varco, L.P. v. Auto-Dril, Inc.

On August 24, 2021, following the jury’s verdict in B&L’s client NOV’s favor, the District Court granted B&L’s Fed. R. Civ. P. 50(a) Motion for Judgment as a Matter of Law (JMOL) dismissing Auto-Dril’s fraud and fraudulent inducement counterclaims as waived, released and also untimely.

See Civil Action No. 5:15-cv-00027 (ECF No. 317 – JMOL Order)

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Texarkana Division.

National Oilwell Varco, L.P. v. Auto-Dril, Inc.

On April 20, 2021, a unanimous jury returned a verdict in B&L’s client NOV’s favor dismissing Auto-Dril’s fraud and fraudulent inducement counterclaims as untimely following a two-week jury trail.

See Civil Action No. 5:15-cv-00027 (ECF No. 289 – VERDICT)

United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Texarkana Division.

Auto-Dril, Inc. v. National Oilwell Varco, L.P. & Canrig Drilling Technology, Ltd.

On April 20, 2018, U.S. District Judge Lee H. Rosenthal entered a Final Judgement in B&L’s clients favor invalidating Auto-Dril’s asserted patent-in-suit (U.S. Patent No. 6,994,172) following a claim construction hearing.  Judge Rosenthal found that Auto-Dril’s patent was indefinite (35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶2) for failing to disclose the necessary algorithm to perform the claimed patented steps.

See Civil Action Nos. H-16-cv-00280, -00293 (ECF No. 202)

United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division