Vicor Corporation v. Delta Electronics, Inc.

IPR2024-00715

Vicor Corporation filed a Petition challenging key claims of Delta Electronics' patent (US 10,877,534), asserting grounds of anticipation and obviousness. The challenger argues that the claimed power supply apparatus is rendered unpatentable by various combinations of prior art references in DC-DC Converters technology.

Jurisdiction
US PTAB
Case Number
IPR2024-00715
Decision Date
25 March 2024
Filing Date
25 March 2024

Detailed Summary

Vicor Corporation initiated a Petition challenging seven claims (13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19) of U.S. Patent No. 10,877,534 held by Delta Electronics, Inc. The challenge rests on multiple statutory grounds, including anticipation under Section 102 and obviousness under Section 103. Specifically, the Petition asserts that the claims are anticipated by Vinciarelli-664 and rendered obvious through combinations involving references such as Vinciarelli-218, Zeng-014, and Park. The technology area involves Power Supplies and DC-DC Converters/Electronic Assemblies.

Practitioner Note

This case demonstrates the evidentiary and procedural standards applied in patent matters before local courts. Understanding the court's reasoning in Vicor Corporation vs Delta Electronics, Inc. is valuable context for structuring arguments or assessing risk in similar proceedings.

Related Cases

patentIPR2025-01537

Hisense USA Corp. et al.vsLight Guide Innovations LLC

Hisense has filed a petition for inter partes review of Light Guide Innovations' U.S. Patent 7,936,415 covering LED backlight modules. The petition asserts seven obviousness grounds based on Roberts and other prior art references, seeking cancellation of all 18 claims.

patentIPR2025-01490

FedEx Corporation et al.vsVALTRUS INNOVATIONS LTD.

FedEx has filed an IPR petition challenging all 26 claims of Valtrus Innovations’ storage‑device performance monitoring patent. The petition asserts that the claims are obvious over prior art references Wolf, Kamiyama, and Woods under 35 U.S.C. §103.

patentIPR2025-01117

UNION ELECTRIC COMPANY et al.vsMES, Inc.

An email from the PTAB Director informs the parties that Director Review requests have been received for IPR2025-01117 and IPR2025-01118, outlining the response requirements and prohibiting new evidence.

patentIPR2025-00687

PacifiCorp et al.vsMES, Inc.

The Director granted review of institution decisions in multiple IPRs involving PacifiCorp and Birchtech Corp., vacating the initial rulings and remanding the cases to the Board for a single, efficient path forward.

patentIPR2025-00815

ClearCorrect Operating, LLC et al.vsAlign Technology, Inc.

ClearCorrect has filed an IPR petition seeking cancellation of all 24 claims of Align Technology’s orthodontic treatment‑planning patent (US 10,524,879), alleging obviousness over four prior‑art references. The petition argues that the round‑tripping collision‑avoidance technique is well‑known.

Arctic Invent — IP Strategy

Dealing with a patent challenge?

Whether it's a Section 3(d) rejection, a post-grant opposition, or a FRAND dispute, Arctic's patent litigation team has handled it. Get a strategy call.

Talk to our patent team →

Disclaimer: This page contains an automated summary based on publicly available judicial records. The content is generated for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Always verify details against the original source judgment before relying on this information for any legal purpose. If you believe any information is inaccurate, please contact us.

Strategy Consult

Facing a similar patent matter?

Arctic's litigation team uses precedent data like this to build winning arguments.

Get a Strategy Call