Dynaenergetics v Geodynamics HP-2017-000063
Dyna sought revocation of Geo’s Patent for “Improvements in and relating to oil well perforators”, EP(UK) 1 671 013 B1. The Patent claimed a shaped charge for downhole applications (i.e. to perforate cased oil wells to connect the wellbore to the hydrocarbon-containing formation) with a liner containing nickel and aluminium as a pressed particulate composition in proportions calculated to form the intermetallic compound NiAl. The benefits of the invention were said to be that (i) additional thermal energy from the intermetallic reaction may help to further distress and fracture the completion; and (ii) the material of the reactive liner may be consumed such that there is no slug of liner material left in the perforation formed.
Dyna alleged that the Patent is invalid for (i) lack of an inventive step over two prior art citations, Battelle and Fischer and (ii) insufficiency. Battelle is the set of lecture notes of Dr. Ing. G. Honcia entitled “Liner Materials for Shaped Charges” given on the “New material technologies for defence engineering” lecture course on 20 April 1988 at the Battelle Institute in Frankfurt Germany. Fischer is Paper No. SAND95-2448C entitled “A survey of combustible metals, thermites and intermetallics for pyrotechnic applications” presented by SH Fischer & MC Grubelich at the 32nd AIAA/ASME/SAE/ASEE Joint Propulsion Conference at Lake Buena Vista, Florida, USA between 1-3 July 1996.
The trial was heard by Nugee J between 31 October and 5 November 2018.
Anna Edwards-Stuart and Adam Gamsa appeared for Dyna, instructed by Shoosmiths LLP