Recently in lawsuit Category

Biobased isobutanol updates

By Doris de Guzman on July 10, 2012 4:08 PM
US bio-butanol producers Gevo and Butamax have been very busy churning out press releases while I was away, and the blog received another two from Gevo this morning.  

Gevo announced today that it has partnered with Italy-based Beta Renewables to develop an integrated process for the production of cellulosic-based isobutanol.

The project would combine Beta's PROESA technology (focusing on cellulosic feedstock pretreatment), Gevo's GIFT process (focusing on isobutanol manufacture via fermentation), and ATJ technologies (I am still trying to figure this one out and has asked Gevo for a background on this technology).

Gevo and Beta Renewables are said to be evaluating future opportunities to partner on other US and international projects with a long-term goal of developing a licensable package for future third parties.

Speaking of cellulosic isobutanol, the blog mentioned last month of Gevo's intent to manufacture the product in Southeast Asia as the company has signed a collaborative agreement with Malaysia's BiotechCorp and East Coast Economic Region Development Council (ECERDC) to build a plant at a biorefinery complex in Kertih, Terengganu.

Gevo's plan is to have a cellulosic isobutanol plant in operation by late 2015 or early 2016.

Another announcement from Gevo today is their progress on the newly-started 18m gal/year bio-isobutanol plant in Luverne, Minnesota. The company said it was able to successfully ferment isobutanol in large 250,000 gal commercial fermenters, and transport it in tanks and railcars.

Some of the initial isobutanol produced will be shipped to customers such as Sasol. Gevo said it plans to be in the start-up/learning mode of operations for most of 2012.

By the way, the production in Luverne was almost jeopardized last month when rival Butamax filed a preliminary injunction request to bar Gevo from operating the plant and selling bio-isobutanol produced from the plant because of ongoing patent disputes. The District Court of Delaware denied the request on June 20.

Butamax released a statement saying that the company plans an immediate appeal to the court's decision. Yesterday, a judge has issued a temporary order restraining Gevo to supply the automotive fuel blendstock market with its bio-isobutanol from Luverne during Butamax's appeal process.

Gevo said yesterday that it has filed an appeal regarding the order and testing for automobile fuels will continue but with non-biobased isobutanol. The company said it is still free to operate in markets such as chemicals, jet fuel, marine fuel, small engine fuel and all other markets.

Other recent news from Gevo and Butamax on bio-isobutanol:

  • Butamax Early Adopters Group surpasses capacity targets with addition of Big River. Membership represents 11 production facilities and nearly 900 million gallons of ethanol capacity

  • Gevo and BioFuel Energy collaborates to explore large-scale isobutanol production


Update: Gevo continues operation

By Doris de Guzman on June 14, 2012 1:25 PM


ICIS news reported* this morning that Gevo will continue to optimize its bio-isobutanol operations in Luverne, Minnesota, as previously planned amid today's injunction decision by the US Federal District Court of Delaware to limit Gevo's commercial activities effective immediately.

The order specifies that Gevo "will not deliver, provide, distribute, ship, release or transfer any of its bio-based isobutanol produced in Luverne facility [that uses recombinant yeast microorganisms] to any third party except that it may sell its bio-based isobutanol to Sasol for chemical applications and the US Air Force for jet fuel testing applications."

The court order resulted from a lawsuit brought by Gevo's competitor Butamax Advanced Biofuels (a joint venture between DuPont and BP). The blog already got lost which one has what patent between these two over bio-isobutanol.

According to Gevo, it will "maintain its status quo" on the Luverne plant given that the company has already started the 18m gal/year bio-isobutanol facility last month, which is expected to produce 1m gal/month of bio-isobutanol by the end of 2012.

"As the judge has not made a decision for or against the preliminary injunction to date, it's understandable that she wants to make sure Gevo sticks to its current business plan. For Gevo, that means we continue to optimize Luverne operating parameters, continue engineering work and preparation for construction of Redfield and most importantly we sell our renewable isobutanol to Sasol and the U.S. Air Force." -- Brett Lund, EVP,  General Counsel for Gevo.
In my interview* with Gevo last month, the company said it expects the Luverne facility to reach full capacity run rates by the end of 2013. The company will start retrofitting another ethanol plant in Redfield, South Dakota, with capacity to produce 40m gal/year of bio-isobutanol.

Since most of the isobutanol product from the Luverne facility is expected to go to Sasol and sampling to the US Air Force, I guess this injunction will not impact Gevo's operation that much. But the company has to resolve this patent issue with Butamax as soon as possible in order to avoid another type of injunction that can cripple their plans for commercialization.

Other customers waiting in line for Gevo's product for chemical applications (that I know of) includes Lanxess, Toray, and Coca-Cola.

Recapping the blog's last post about Gevo and Butamax's patent battles since April:


UPDATE 6/14/2012
Butamax's corporate communications manager Pamela Schools sent the blog an email today wanting to add some comments to the ongoing lawsuits:

  • In April, Gevo has been granted patent 8,153, 415, and also filed a lawsuit against Butamax/DuPont stating Butamax has been using the related technology covered by this patent.
    • "Butamax does not infringe any valid claim of this patent."
  • On May 3, Butamax requested the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) to re-examine Gevo's patent 8,101,808. The USPTO, however, denied Butamax its request to also re-examine Gevo's patent 8,017,376
    • "The request for reexamination of the '376 patent was granted. This patent is in reexamination and several claims were in fact rejected as anticipated by Butamax's own patent applications."
  • On May 15, Butamax said the USPTO has granted the company patent 8,178,328, which covers an engineered pathway for producing isobutanol from recombinant microorganisms at commercial scale.  It also includes extraction and distillation of the isobutanol, and steps for recovering distillers grain produced during isobutanol fermentation. Butamax added the '328 patent to its ongoing litigation against Gevo, which in return Gevo dismissed in a statement stating that it is virtually identical to the claims in Butamax's earlier issued 7,851,188 patent, which were rejected and declared unpatentable by the USPTO during reexamination.
    • "Certain claims of the '188 patent are under reexamination but not all the claims. Further, the US PTO only issued an Office Action for which Butamax has an opportunity to respond. This is the process of reexamination and the patent remains in full force and effect during reexamination." 
Speaking of lawsuits unrelated to the Gevo-Butamax saga, the blog also received recent news on this front from Neste Oil. 

The Finnish biofuel player filed a patent infringement suit against US-based Dynamic Fuels, Syntroleum and Tyson Foods. Dynamic Fuels, which produces animal fats-based diesel, is a joint venture between Syntroleum and Tyson Foods.

Neste Oil said one of its patents is believed to have been infringed by Dynamic Fuels in the production of renewable diesel at Dynamic Fuels' plant in Geismar, Louisiana.

This patent was issued by the USPTO on May 29, 2012, and expires in 2025. Neste is already producing its own fats and oils-based diesel at its sites in Singapore, the Netherlands and Finland under the company's technology called NExBTL renewable diesel.

Syntroleum released a statement that the Neste Oil patent no. 8,187,344 is "related to and shares the same inventors as a prior Neste patent 7,279,018." Claims to the '018 patent were said to have been rejected upon reexamination by the USPTO. Syntroleum claims it has not infringed any of Neste's patent rights.

*Subscription required


« Investments | Main Index | Archives | News Roundup »
Related Posts with Thumbnails