Thread regarding Baker Hughes Inc. layoffs

Baker Hughes Accuses Small Family Business of Trademark Infringement

This is one of those situations that makes me sick to my stomach. Where the f*** does Martin get off suing another company that is MAKING JOBS. I guess this bastard wants his 29million so bad that if he can't have it, he'll go after anyone who's still employing AMERICAN CITIZENS. Bhi you make me want to throw up

http://m.texaslawyer.com/module/alm/app/tx.do#!/article/1751944953

In today's busy industrial marketplace crowded with numerous products, sometimes it's hard to tell the difference between real and rip-off.

Alleging trademark infringement, Baker Hughes Inc. is suing Thor's Oil Products Inc., contending that the North Dakota company is using the Texas oil services giant's trademark-protected brand names for its products used in hydraulic fracturing. Thor's Oil is a North Dakota corporation that only has one employee, according to Lauri Uhryn, who handles affairs for the family business.

Baker Hughes recently filed its case against Thor's Oil in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston Division. The complaint alleges that Baker Hughes owns the U.S. trademark registration issued June 25, 2013, for the mark LITEPROP® for proppants used in oil well and gas well hydraulic fracturing operations. A proppant is a solid material, typically sand, treated sand or human-made ceramic materials, designed to keep an induced hydraulic fracture open, during or following a fracturing treatment.

According to the complaint, Baker Hughes has used the trademark LITEPROP in interstate commerce continuously since at least as early as 2003. As a result of Baker Hughes' marketing of its products and the extensive advertising and other business generation efforts to promote its products associated with the trademark LITEPROP, the trademark LITEPROP has become well-known globally as identifying Baker Hughes' proppants.

Thor's Oil, the defendant in the case, is a proppant supplier that, per its website, "services the United States and Canada," according to the complaint. Baker Hughes alleges that "Thor's Oil defendant is selling and offering for sale proppants for use in oil well and gas well hydraulic fracturing operations that are branded with Baker Hughes' federally registered trademark LITEPROP®."

Baker Hughes also alleges that Thor's Oil has in the past obtained LITEPROP-branded and MIDPROP-branded proppants from a company in China. "Defendant then imported such proppants into the United States for sale and use in North Dakota and, on information and belief, in Texas," according to the complaint.

The complaint further contends that "Thor's Oil's LITEPROP-branded and MIDPROP-branded proppants are not authorized or otherwise approved of by Baker Hughes and, therefore, are not authentic LITEPROP-branded proppants. In particular, Baker Hughes did not manufacture, produce or inspect the defendant's proppants and did not approve the defendant's proppants for sale and/or distribution."

On or about Nov. 21, 2013, Baker Hughes advised the then president of Thor's Oil of Baker Hughes' rights to the mark LITEPROP and expressly requested that defendants immediately cease and desist from continued use of the marks LITEPROP and MIDPROP, according to the complaint.

In addition, Baker Hughes alleges that Thor's Oil did not fully comply with Baker Hughes' demand. Although Thor's Oil advised Baker Hughes that it had removed its brochure that refers to LITEPROP and MIDPROP from its website, the North Dakota company did not remove from its company website a video that promoted and offered to the public LITEPROP-branded and MIDPROP-branded proppants, according to the complaint.

Baker Hughes' complaint asserts three counts against Thor's Oil: federal trademark counterfeiting and infringement, unfair competition and false designation of origin, and trademark infringement and unfair competition under Texas law.

Anthony Matheny, Baker Hughes' attorney-in-charge in the company's Houston office, declined to comment about the case. Likewise, Mike Uhryn, Thor's Oil's president in the company's Williston, North Dakota, office, declined to discuss the case. Currently, Thor's Oil is not being represented by counsel in connection with this lawsuit.

Moving forward, the case is scheduled for an initial pretrial and scheduling conference before Judge Lee Rosenthal in Houston on Nov. 20, 2015.

by
| 1059 views | | 2 replies (last ) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+D0jEQMG

2 replies (most recent on top)

It's a moot point because BH Pressure pumping services are garbage and are arguably the reason why we failed in the first place. Everyone worth 2 cents knows that Tools are our bread butter and that we failed immensely attempting to run a pressure pumping division. Our pressure pumping will ultimately be hacked up and sold to the highest bidder, most likely a Chinese company, and we're out there suing the so called competition? Get real. No one believes that. Look at the big picture. Bhi is notorious for outsourcing all functions to Mumbai India, and then all the H1B's here taking more American jobs, hell your job is most likely next. Yeh bhi has the nerve to go after a company that is employing Americans? Who the f*** does Rupaul Craighead think he is

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1OSc+D0jEQMG

BHI has a right to their trademarks and to prevent others from using them. However in this case, it sounds like Thor's Oil tried to comply by removing the trademark infringing brochures and might have missed the videos. BHI is being opportunistic in taking them to court. BHI is a bad tempered company.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @zKX+D0jEQMG

Post a reply

: