巴尔的摩（ 7月1日，下午12:30东部时间） -呼叫它干燥星球大战：第二轮。

Novatec公司还击竞争对手康耐尔集团的专利侵权诉讼，涉及两个单独的设计气流进入料斗提高能源效率的干燥机。

巴尔的摩的Novatec递交的诉讼6月26日在美国联邦地方法院在费城，指控康耐尔的EnergySmart树脂违反了专利Novatec用于开发其智能塑料干燥系统。

“失去了Novatec估计的销售和制造利润超过800万美元，将寻求充分和惩罚性赔偿金由康耐尔说， ”康拉德贝塞麦，公司总裁兼首席执行官Novatec 。四页的诉讼没有具体的金额，这贝塞麦说Novatec已经失去了计算的销售和制造的利润。

顶端康耐尔执行，克里斯托弗凯勒，否认有任何侵犯。

“我不知道康耐尔侵犯任何人的专利，更Novatec的， ”凯勒说。 “知识产权是一个非常严肃的课题对我们来说，我们会相应地对待这个问题。 ”他是总裁兼首席运营官的康耐尔，总部设在蔓越莓乡宾夕法尼亚州匹兹堡附近。

仅4天前，康耐尔撤回自己的专利侵权诉讼Novatec后Novatec同意将判处其产品说明书和网站上的智能聚酯，澄清事实，即料斗温度传感器不控制干燥过程。

法律战不仅是专利和机械设计。恶劣的语言-与一些人身攻击-也正在升温干燥竞争对手之间的制造商。

康耐尔表示，其早先的诉讼涉及补充说： “阴谋”的康拉德贝塞麦，前康耐尔执行谁离开领导的投资集团收购Novatec于2006年。康耐尔暗示Novatec ，根据贝塞麦，发达国家模仿康耐尔干燥机。康耐尔提起诉讼在4月中旬和6月22日驳回。

贝塞麦所谓康耐尔早先的情况下， “小事” ， “毫无根据”和“蓄意努力玷污”他的声誉。

6月30日在新闻发布会宣布其新的诉讼，指控康耐尔Novatec官员-包括凯勒- “显然是由于机密资料”关于Novatec和双阶段的技术，当他们访问Novatec在2004年和2005年，研究购买公司。他们签署了保密协议， Novatec索赔。

“据称，使用这种康耐尔机密信息纳入双流技术（这是保护Novatec专利）作为其EnergySmart产品， ” Novatec表示，在其新闻发布中。

接触的塑料新闻，凯勒说，他不能评论是否康耐尔高层访问Novatec或想收购该公司。

贝塞麦说Novatec已调查涉嫌侵权的EnergySmart三四个月，早康耐尔提出的诉讼。 Novatec推迟计划提出自己的诉讼，直到康耐尔文学措辞案件得到解决，他说。

在新的诉讼，索赔康耐尔Novatec的EnergySmart侵犯其专利的双流安排两个气流进入干燥料斗。康耐尔使用的术语是分两个阶段来描述原始EnergySmart 。

Novatec说，这种“双向”漏斗是涉及专利发表的关于2006年3月7日，以美国吉列公司， Novatec公司的工程副总裁，并分配给该公司。

美国专利7007402描述的方法干燥物质在“双流漏斗” ，利用两个入口港口，其中热风插入漏斗在两个不同的层次。空气中提取的漏斗，并划分为流动沿两个流动路径-一个接受空气流路已干和其他空中还没有干。因为只有部分空气从穿过料斗干燥机，您可以使用一个较小的干燥，降低了设备成本和削减能源消耗。

Novatec希望禁制令禁止康耐尔从侵犯其专利权。

英文原文

BALTIMORE (July 1, 12:30 p.m. ET) -- Call it Dryer Wars: Round Two.

Novatec Inc. has fired back at rival Conair Group Inc. with a patent infringement lawsuit, covering a design of two separate airstreams going into a hopper to boost the energy efficiency of a dryer.

Baltimore-based Novatec filed the lawsuit June 26 in U.S. District Court in Philadelphia, charging that Conair’s EnergySmart resin violates a patent Novatec used to develop its Intelli PET Drying System.

“Novatec has estimated lost sales and manufacturing profits exceeding $8 million and will be seeking full and punitive damages from Conair,” said Conrad Bessemer, president and CEO of Novatec. The four-page lawsuit does not specify the amount of money, which Bessemer said Novatec has calculated based on lost sales and manufacturing profits.

The top Conair executive, Christopher Keller, denied any infringement.

“I’m not aware of Conair infringing on anyone’s patents, much less Novatec’s,” Keller said. “Intellectual property is a very serious topic for us, and we’ll treat this matter accordingly.” He is president and chief operating officer of Conair, based in Cranberry Township, Pa., near Pittsburgh.

Just four days earlier, Conair withdrew its own patent infringement lawsuit against Novatec after Novatec agreed to add a sentence to its product literature and Web site about the Intelli PET, clarifying the fact that hopper temperature sensors do not control the drying process.

The legal battle is not just about patents and machinery designs. Harsh language — with some personal attacks — also is heating up between the rival dryer manufacturers.

Conair said its earlier suit involved the “added intrigue” of Conrad Bessemer, the former Conair executive who left to lead an investor group that bought Novatec in 2006. Conair implied that Novatec, under Bessemer, developed dryers that mimic Conair dryers. Conair filed the suit in mid-April and dismissed it June 22.

Bessemer called Conair’s earlier case a “trivial matter,” “baseless” and “a deliberate effort to besmirch” his reputation.

In a June 30 news release to announce its new lawsuit, Novatec charges that Conair officials — including Keller — “were apparently given confidential information” about Novatec and the dual-stage technology, when they visited Novatec in 2004 and 2005 to look into buying the company. They signed a confidentiality agreement, Novatec claims.

“It is alleged that Conair used this confidential information to incorporate dual-flow technology (which is protected by the Novatec patent) as part of their EnergySmart product,” Novatec said in its news release.

Contacted by Plastics News, Keller said he could not comment on whether Conair executives visited Novatec or wanted to buy the company.

Bessemer said Novatec had been investigating the alleged infringement of EnergySmart for three or four months, predating the filing of Conair’s lawsuit. Novatec delayed plans to file its own suit until the Conair literature-wording case was settled, he said.

In the new lawsuit, Novatec claims Conair’s EnergySmart violates its patent for a dual-flow arrangement with two air streams going into the drying hopper. Conair uses the term two-stage to describe the original EnergySmart.

Novatec says this “dual-flow” hopper is covered in a patent issued on March 7, 2006, to John Gillette, Novatec’s vice president of engineering, and assigned to the company.

U.S. patent 7,007,402 describes a way to dry material in a “dual-flow hopper” that uses two inlet ports, by which heated air is inserted into the hopper at two different levels. The air is extracted from the hopper and is divided for flow along two flow paths — one flow path receiving air that has been dried and the other for air that has not been dried. Because only part of the air from the hopper passes through a dryer, you can use a smaller dryer, reducing the equipment costs and cutting energy consumption.

Novatec wants an injunction barring Conair from infringing on the patent.