Fitch Even brings a combination of mechanical and chemical engineering knowledge and Intellectual Property (IP) expertise to protect environmental-related technologies. Drawing on broad capabilities, we offer clients comprehensive protection strategies at every stage, from patent procurement to licensing and final enforcement.
We represent market leaders in providing products and processes for:
- wastewater treatment
- water desalination
- grey water reclamation for irrigation use
- water conservation
- exhaust emissions processing associated with food production
- construction materials recycling
IP Protection for the Entire Product Lifecycle
In a business sector where complex products and IP strategies are at the core of success, Fitch Even’s integrated patent portfolio and enforcement strategies ensure that environmental engineering clients receive maximum protection at every stage of development and commercialization. In one example, working with a major manufacturer of wastewater treatment mixing systems, we brought to bear our knowledge of mechanical engineering and hydraulics to obtain patents covering various aspects of this uniquely reliable and high-volume capacity technology. Later, these patents were successfully enforced. This is just one of many examples demonstrating our expertise in obtaining and enforcing patents in environmental engineering-related technology to effectively protect a client’s business.
Case Studies
Client: A developer and manufacturer of industrial tank mixing technology and products used in wastewater treatment.
Problem: A former employee of our client went to work for a competitor. The competitor then began infringing our client’s patent for tank mixing technology and did so under the umbrella of a purported non-infringement opinion from its own attorneys.
Solution: Fitch Even brought suit in federal court for patent infringement in which it demonstrated that the competitor’s hiring of a former employee of our client was persuasive evidence of copying, and that the competitor failed to provide its attorney with the necessary information to provide a competent non-infringement opinion.
Result: A jury returned, in our client’s favor, a verdict of willful infringement against the competitor, which was affirmed on appeal by the Federal Circuit.
