SHELL OIL AND AFFILIATES, INCLUDING TWISTER BV, SUED FOR IP THEFT
SHELL OIL, INC. AND SOME OF ITS AFFILIATES INCLUDING TWISTER BV, ARE BEING SUED FOR THEFT OF TRADE SECRETS.
It is alleged that Shell misappropriated technology that is being used in the Twister BV separation technology.
By John Donovan
The launch of this website was not prompted by concern over Shell’s disgraceful track record in Nigeria, nor its support for evil apartheid policies in South Africa, or some other noble humanitarian cause that I felt strongly about. I am not sure I was even aware of those matters at the time.
My motive was much more selfish. What fired me up was Shell’s repeated theft of ideas I disclosed to the company in strictest confidence, the arrogance displayed by senior management in trying to defend the indefensible and in the process resorting to intimidation and all manner of dirty tricks, including undercover activity and spying.
Even when Shell settled claims out of court, as they did with SIX successive high court actions I brought against them, all of the settlements were cloaked in secrecy and deceit to prevent shareholders and the public from knowing about Shell’s dishonesty. See High Court papers unveil ‘secret’ Shell writ losses– a multi-page magazine feature covering the first three settlements. Four of the cases were for alleged IP theft and two for libel.
Nothing is too low for Shell, even when totally at odds with Shell’s claimed business principles.
Consequently, when I learn about other individuals or small companies trying to confront the Anglo-Dutch oil giant about alleged IP theft – unfortunately it happens all too often – they naturally have my immediate sympathy and support.
I occasionally stumble across such cases when trawling US court records via my PACER account, which provides public access to US Court electronic records.
In this instance, a company called Newton Research Partners is suing Shell Oil and some of its affiliates including TWISTER BV, which seems an ironically appropriate name after reading the details set out in the FIFTH AMENDED PETITION dated 21 November 2012.
Does anyone have any information about this?
As was the case in the Bernstein law firm’s oil reserve case against Royal Dutch Shell some years ago, there are those of you that wished to help and kindly stepped forward with evidence. Anyone with information regarding this matter may contact me in confidence. Although I already have an insider source in the Netherlands, more information would be very welcome.
Case Overview
Shell Technology E&P in the Netherlands became interested in an air conditioning nozzle technology they thought could be used for cleansing natural gas. At the same time Shell Exploration and Production in the United States was working with an inventor who also had nozzle technology for use cleansing natural gas. There were unpermitted communications between Shell United States and Shell Netherlands and very quickly the staff from the Netherlands added new features to the Stork air conditioning technology that were like those in the United States technology. It seems from the public record a person involved with Shell Technology E&P (Netherlands) entering into a program to use the air conditioning nozzle technology was also the person who communicated with Shell Exploration and Production (United States) about the nozzle technology they were gathering information about.
The Twister Nozzle Story
A 2002 Shell article about how Twister BV got its start says that, “The idea (Stork Product Engineering’s nozzle) was developed for drying air in air-conditioning applications was not found to be cost-effective in that industry. However, the idea was not was not lost on Kees Tjeenk-Willink, who was working as a Chief Engineer for [Nederlandse Aardolie Maatschapij B.V.] in Groningen and who saw of the concept for the natural gas industry.” “He took the idea to Shell Technology E&P [STEP], and the company initiated a development programme. This led to the first field application of Twister on natural gas in 1997″. (see SEPARATING SHELL FROM THE COMPETITION) According to another article by Twister BV, they describe the sequence a bit differently with a first test of the Stork technology in a laboratory in 1997 followed by a field test mid-1998 in Groningen, a natural gas field. (see Twister-a revolution in gas separation)
Capital is raised and Twister BV is formed in 2001
“NEW YORK, April 12 /PRNewswire/ — Shell International Exploration and Production B.V., a company of the Royal Dutch/Shell Group of Companies, and The Beacon Group announced today the establishment of a joint venture and the formation of the Shell Technology Investments Partnership C.V., to be based in Rijswijk, The Netherlands. (continuing)
Today also, Shell and Beacon announced the formation of Twister B.V., the first commercial venture of the partnership. Twister B.V. will market innovative gas processing technologies to the global exploration and production market, based on Shell’s supersonic gas separation technology. Twister B. V.’s initial commercial product — its supersonic separator — is able to separate both hydrocarbon liquids and water from natural gas. The supersonic separator can reduce field facilities costs by up to 40 percent, by processing gas more efficiently and more effectively. It has a number of unique features including a considerably smaller environmental footprint, zero emissions and the complete absence of moving parts. Shell Technology Investments Partnership C.V. and Twister B.V. expect this technology to rapidly become a market leader. Erik Vallebregt, chief executive officer of the management company, said, “I am thrilled that our new investment partnership can be launched by the formation of Twister B.V. The supersonic separator is a great product with a great future: it is a step forward in gas processing technology, it is environmentally friendly, and more efficient and effective than existing processes.”(http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releasesl shell-and-the-beacon-group-establish-a-technology-investment-partnership-first-venture-Iaunched-72563977.htmI)
Cornelis Antonie “Kees” Tjeenk Willink, became Twister’s Chief Executive Officer.
The Competing Nozzle Technology
During the same time frame of 1997 and 1998, while Kees Tjeenk-Willink of the Netherlands was bringing Stork Product Engineering’s air conditioning nozzle to Shell Technology E&P [STEP] Shell Exploration and Production [SEPCO] was under a Confidential Disclosure Agreement (CDA) with Michael Bloom in the United States to learn more about his nozzles and centrifuges and how they could be used to cleanse natural gas. There were some important differences in the Stork and Bloom nozzles. For example, among other differences, Stork’s nozzle created a swirl well down into the nozzle. (refer to Twister-a revolution in gas separation, pg 2 diagram) Mr. Bloom’s nozzle used swirl at the inlet of the nozzle. (see pages 1-5 of BRIEF OF APPELLEE http://www.courtstuff.com/EDOCS/11/0/11040930.PDF)
Against the provisions of the CDA, SEPCO was communicating with the Netherlands about Mr. Bloom’s technology, as can be seen by the following excerpt from the BRIEF OF APPELLEE.
“Steven Canter (“Canter”), a SEPCo employee, testified that he discussed Bloom’s technologies with a European Shell affiliate:
Q: Well, had you had any discussions with anyone in the European operations about Mike Bloom’s technology?
A: I had had discussions with Andy Brechwoldt about the technology long before that, when he was in the U.S. At this point in August of ’98, he was – - he had been transferred to the European office. So strictly speaking, yes, there had been some communications with the European office prior to this August 21st date [referring to the email discussed below].
2-SealedCR APP 590-91. Subsequent to his discussions with Andy Brechwoldt (“Brechwoldt”), Canter sent an email to a number of individuals outside of SEPCo, including Corne lis Antonie “Kees” Tjeenk Willink (“Tjeenk Willink”) and Brecholdt, concerning Bloom’s/Newton’s Technologies. ld. at 429-30. Tjeenk Willink responded to Canter asking “Even whilst you believe that the centrifuge is dead, could you give me some more technical details … So, what is the concept behind the lead you were following?” Id. at 429. Canter responded to Tjeenk Willink’s inquiry with additional details concerning Bloom’s technologies. Id. At the time of its incorporation, Tjeenk Willink was Twister’s CEO and as of 200B was its Chief Operating Officer and Chief Technology Officer. CR.59-60, 112.
Is it reasonable that so much could be invented in such a short period of time, and that the inventions were the same as the other technology?
According to Twister’s and Shell’s own press releases, the Stork air conditioning nozzle was looked at by STEP and Tjeenk Willink in 1997 and based upon that a programme was entered into with Stork. The first field test of that technology took place in mid-199B. Also, in mid-199B SEPCo from the United States was evaluating Mr. Bloom’s technology and communication with Tjeenk Willink in the Netherlands. After only a few months of working with Stork’s technology, on the last day of 1998 Tjeenk Willink and others filed 5 United States patents claiming features that were the same as those in Mr. Bloom’s work. These patent applications are assigned to Shell Oil Co. (see 3 pages from file wrapper of US application No. 09/223,884)
RELATED ARTICLES
- Shell prosecuted for “fraud and theft of intellectual property”…: 15 August 2006
- Legal proceedings against Shell in Houston for fraud and theft of intellectual property: 18 August 2006
- Do you have grounds for a lawsuit against Shell? Have you, your firm or family been cheated or injured by Shell?: 9 February 2007
- Warning to the new partner in Shell Technology Ventures Fund 1 BV: 5 April 2007
- U.S. Courts: Shell in deepwater, accused of more IP theft: 12 August 2008
- U.S. Courts: Shell in deepwater, accused of more IP theft (revised article): 13 August 2008
- Tips on suing Royal Dutch Shell for theft of Intellectual Property: 29 July 2009
- ENERTAG PATENTS: MORE ROYAL DUTCH SHELL IP CHICANERY?: 4 November 2009
- Habitual Intellectual Property Theft by Royal Dutch Shell: 4 July 2010
- U.S. Dept. of Defense Confirms NCIS Espionage Investigation of Shell: 7 October 2010
- Shell investigates alleged IP theft at Geelong Refinery: 21 April 2012
- Alleged IP theft from employee of Shell Geelong Refinery: 29 April 2012
- Sorid side of Shell at Geelong Refinery: 5 May 2012
- Another alleged case of IP theft hits Royal Dutch Shell: 20 May 2012
- Shell’s predatory appetite for intellectual property: 20 May 2012
- Another example of Shell IP theft: Shell Oil Must Pay $153.6 Mln Award to Union Carbide: 17 June 2012
- SHELL GEELONG REFINERY AND DIANA NEWMAN: 9 July 2012
- The danger of getting into bed with Shell: 31 March 2013
- The risk of sharing your ideas with Shell: 26 Sept 2013
The TRUTH will set you FREE.
No comments:
Post a Comment