1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION 

CAMERON INTERNATIONAL 

CORPORATION,

Plaintiff,

v.

NITRO FLUIDS, L.L.C.,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:20-cv-00125

JURY TRIAL REQUESTED

NITRO FLUIDS’ ADVISORY MEMORANDUM REGARDING CONSTRUCTION 

OF “OUTLET BRANCH(ES)”

At the October 16, 2020, claim construction hearing, Plaintiff Cameron International 

Corporation (“Cameron”) proposed two new constructions for the term “outlet branch(es)” in U.S. 

Patent No. 10,385,645 (the ’645 patent). Specifically, Cameron proposed that the term be 

construed, alternatively, as either:

a) “extension(s) originating from the shared trunk conduit and 

extending to the rigid fluid conduit(s);” or 

b) “outlet(s) beginning at the shared trunk line and ending at 

the rigid fluid conduit(s).”

The Court took the new constructions under consideration and indicated that it would 

change its preliminary construction that the term was indefinite and would instead find the term 

definite. The Court stated that Nitro Fluids, L.L.C. (“Nitro”) would be given an opportunity to 

provide its position on Cameron’s new proposed constructions after the hearing. 

Despite Cameron’s newly proposed constructions, Nitro believes that “outlet branches” are 

indefinite because where the outlet branches end cannot be discerned with reasonable certainty. 

Case 6:20-cv-00125-ADA Document 53 Filed 10/20/20 Page 1 of 5
2

At the claim construction hearing Cameron used color-coded, annotated figures to map out its 

interpretation of where the outlet branches begin and end. Notably, these figures have considerable 

structural differences from the actual figures in the patent, which does not use the term “outlet 

branches” anywhere in the specification. Regardless, in slide 31 Cameron color coded portions of 

the alleged outlet branches in purple and arbitrarily ended them after the first spool of pipe. 

However, nothing in the specification supports Cameron’s interpretation over the other 

possibilities that exist. It is just as reasonable to interpret the “outlet branches” as extending to the 

second pipes 170 toward the trees 20 (or even further):

Case 6:20-cv-00125-ADA Document 53 Filed 10/20/20 Page 2 of 5
3

Thus, while Cameron has clearly depicted what the branches could be using its color-coded 

drawings (provided for the first time during the hearing), none of this creative box drawing is 

actually supported by the specification. The specification is devoid of any mention of “branches” 

and whether Cameron’s interpretation or any of the other reasonable ones is correct cannot be 

discerned with reasonable certainty based on the intrinsic record. 

For the reasons above, Nitro opposes the adoption of the newly proposed constructions 

proffered by Cameron during the claim construction hearing. Nitro respectfully requests that the 

Court adopt its preliminary construction that the term “outlet branch(es)” in the asserted claims of 

the ’645 patent is indefinite. Nitro reserves all rights to argue indefiniteness either going forward 

in this litigation (consistent with the Court’s instructions) or on appeal. 

If the Court is to change its initial proposed construction for “branches” from indefinite to 

definite, Nitro believes that the court should simply adopt “plain and ordinary meaning” for this 

term. 

Case 6:20-cv-00125-ADA Document 53 Filed 10/20/20 Page 3 of 5
4

October 20, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ J. David Cabello

J. David Cabello

Attorney-in-Charge

J. David Cabello

Texas Bar No. 03574500

James H. Hall

Texas Bar No. 24041040

Stephen D. Zinda

Texas Bar No. 24084147

CABELLO HALL ZINDA, PLLC

801 Travis Street, Suite 1610

Houston, TX 77002

Tel: 832-631-9990

Fax: 832-631-9991

Email: david@chzfirm.com

Email: james@chzfirm.com

Email: stephen@chzfirm.com 

Attorneys for Defendant Nitro Fluids, LLC

Case 6:20-cv-00125-ADA Document 53 Filed 10/20/20 Page 4 of 5
5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that on October 20, 2020 a true and correct copy of the 

foregoing document was electronically filed with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, 

which sends notifications of such filing to all counsel of record who have consented to accept 

service by electronic means. 

/s/ Sherri Brunner

Sherri Brunner

Case 6:20-cv-00125-ADA Document 53 Filed 10/20/20 Page 5 of 5