Short Summary
Vicor Corporation has filed a Director Review request challenging the Board’s denial to institute an IPR on Delta Electronics’ 10,877,534 patent covering stacked power converters. The petitioner contends the Board relied on unsupported expert testimony contrary to prior art.
Detailed Summary
In Petitioner's Request for Director Review (IPR2024-00715), Vicor Corporation challenges the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s decision to deny institution of an inter partes review of Delta Electronics’ U.S. Patent No. 10,877,534, which claims stacked power converter configurations. Vicor asserts that the Board improperly gave weight to the patent owner’s expert testimony alleging heat‑dissipation issues, despite a lack of objective evidence and the existence of heat‑sink‑less embodiments in the Vinciarelli‑218 prior art. The petitioner seeks clarification of 37 C.F.R. §42.108(c) and a reversal of the denial, arguing that the factual dispute should be resolved at trial rather than at the institution stage.
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
Amazon.com, Inc. et al.vsNokia Technologies Oy
Amazon and Nokia have settled their dispute over U.S. Patent 8,077,991 and jointly moved to terminate the inter partes review, citing statutory authority and public‑policy benefits.
Lenovo (United States) Inc. et al.vsHeadwater Research LLC
Lenovo and Motorola filed a joint request to keep their settlement agreement confidential and to terminate the IPR against Headwater Research's patent 10,749,700. The motion relies on statutory confidentiality provisions.
Meta Platforms, Inc.vsDialect, LLC
Meta Platforms has filed a petition for inter partes review of Dialect’s ’825 patent covering speech‑recognition methods, asserting that the claims are obvious over multiple prior‑art references.
Mercedes-Benz Group AG et al.vsPhelan Group, LLC
Mercedes‑Benz and The Phelan Group jointly filed a motion asking the PTAB to keep their settlement agreement confidential under 35 U.S.C. § 317(b) and to terminate the IPR. The request emphasizes the agreement’s sensitive business terms.
Meta Platforms, Inc.vsMullen Industries LLC
Meta Platforms has filed an IPR petition seeking to invalidate five claims of Mullen Industries' location‑based gaming patent, arguing they are obvious over the Levine prior‑art application.
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.
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.