DCT
1:11-cv-00117
X2Y Attenuators LLC v. Intel Corp
I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information
- Parties & Counsel:
- Plaintiff: X2Y Attenuators, LLC (Nevada)
- Defendant: Intel Corporation (Delaware), Apple Inc. (California), and Hewlett-Packard Company (Delaware)
- Plaintiff’s Counsel: Alston & Bird
- Case Identification: 1:11-cv-00117, W.D. Pa., 05/31/2011
- Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper because Defendants are deemed to reside in the district as corporations, transact business there, are subject to personal jurisdiction, and have regular and established places of business within the district.
- Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ microprocessors and personal computers that contain such microprocessors infringe five patents related to circuit arrangements for conditioning electrical energy.
- Technical Context: The technology addresses the management of electrical noise and power integrity in high-frequency integrated circuits, a critical issue for the performance and stability of modern microprocessors.
- Key Procedural History: The complaint does not mention any prior litigation, licensing history, or administrative proceedings related to the patents-in-suit.
Case Timeline
| Date | Event |
|---|---|
| 1997-04-08 | Earliest Priority Date for ’249, ’227, and ’500 Patents |
| 2000-08-03 | Earliest Priority Date for ’621 and ’444 Patents |
| 2004-05-18 | U.S. Patent No. 6,738,249 Issues |
| 2006-09-19 | U.S. Patent No. 7,110,227 Issues |
| 2009-10-27 | U.S. Patent No. 7,609,500 Issues |
| 2010-06-08 | U.S. Patent No. 7,733,621 Issues |
| 2011-03-29 | U.S. Patent No. 7,916,444 Issues |
| 2011-05-31 | Complaint Filed |
II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis
U.S. Patent No. 6,738,249, “Universal Energy Conditioning Interposer With Circuit Architecture,” Issued May 18, 2004
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent’s background section describes challenges in interconnecting and packaging integrated circuit (IC) chips, particularly in multi-chip modules. As processor operating frequencies increase past 1 GHz, traditional interconnections exhibit high impedance, leading to undesired electrical noise, energy loss, excess heat, and electromagnetic interference (EMI) that can disrupt circuit operation (’249 Patent, col. 2:10-21, 41-54).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is an "interposer," a multi-layer substrate designed to sit between electronic components, such as an IC and a printed circuit board. It employs a specific circuit architecture comprising a centrally positioned "common conductive shield structure" sandwiched between paired conductive pathways. This layered arrangement conditions energy by providing functions such as bypassing, decoupling, and EMI filtering, thereby maintaining a stable and balanced voltage supply for the IC (’249 Patent, Abstract; col. 1:30-45).
- Technical Importance: The invention provides a structural solution to energy conditioning problems that were becoming more severe as passive component technology failed to keep pace with the rapid increases in microprocessor speeds (’249 Patent, col. 2:45-54).
Key Claims at a Glance
The complaint does not assert specific claims, alleging infringement of the patent generally (Compl. ¶13). As an exemplar, independent claim 1 requires:
- An energy conditioning interposer component assembly comprising:
- a plurality of common electrodes, including a central common electrode, a first common electrode, and a second common electrode;
- at least one pair of differential electrodes, including a first and second differential electrode;
- a specific stacked arrangement wherein the first differential electrode is above the central common electrode and the second differential electrode is below it;
- a further stacked arrangement wherein the first common electrode is above the first differential electrode and the second common electrode is below the second differential electrode; and
- an insulating material separating the electrodes.
U.S. Patent No. 7,110,227, “Universal Energy Conditioning Interposer With Circuit Architecture,” Issued September 19, 2006
The Invention Explained
- Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the same technical problem as the ’249 Patent: undesired noise, energy loss, and EMI created by high-impedance energy pathways in high-frequency electronic systems, which conventional passive components fail to adequately address (’227 Patent, col. 2:16-29).
- The Patented Solution: The invention is described as an "integral capacitor" formed by a specific geometric arrangement of conductive planes. It consists of a power plane and at least one ground plane, with the ground plane being physically larger and extending beyond the periphery of the power plane. This overlapping structure is designed to create a Faraday cage-like shield that contains energy fields, thereby providing decoupling and suppressing electromagnetic emissions (’227 Patent, col. 22:20-28, 51-61).
- Technical Importance: This approach offers an integrated, structural method for creating capacitance and shielding directly within the circuit substrate, aiming to provide a more effective solution for high-frequency energy conditioning than discrete capacitor components (’227 Patent, col. 4:1-5).
Key Claims at a Glance
The complaint does not assert specific claims, alleging infringement of the patent generally (Compl. ¶26). As an exemplar, independent claim 1 requires:
- An integral capacitor comprising:
- a power plane with a power surface and a power periphery;
- a first ground plane with a first ground surface and a first ground periphery;
- the first ground plane being separated from the power plane by a first distance; and
- the first ground periphery extending at least a second distance from the power periphery, where the second distance is at least N times the first distance.
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,609,500
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7609500, “Universal Energy Conditioning Interposer With Circuit Architecture,” Issued October 27, 2009 (Compl. ¶37).
- Technology Synopsis: This patent, from the same family as the ’249 Patent, describes an interposer for energy conditioning. It addresses the problem of EMI and noise in high-speed circuits by using a multi-layer structure of common and differential electrodes to create a shielding architecture that conditions energy for an integrated circuit (’500 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint alleges infringement of the patent generally (Compl. ¶39).
- Accused Features: The accused features are microprocessors, such as the Intel Core i7-950, and personal computers containing them (Compl. ¶¶39-42).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,733,621
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7733621, “Energy Conditioning Circuit Arrangement for Integrated Circuit,” Issued June 8, 2010 (Compl. ¶50).
- Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a circuit arrangement for conditioning energy supplied to an integrated circuit. It addresses noise and power integrity issues by using a layered structure of conductive pathways, including shielded conductors, to manage energy flow and suppress interference (’621 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint alleges infringement of the patent generally (Compl. ¶52).
- Accused Features: The accused features are microprocessors and products that contain microprocessors, including specified models from Intel, Apple, and Hewlett-Packard (Compl. ¶¶52-55).
Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,916,444
- Patent Identification: U.S. Patent No. 7916444, “Arrangement for Energy Conditioning,” Issued March 29, 2011 (Compl. ¶63).
- Technology Synopsis: This patent discloses an arrangement for energy conditioning using relative groupings of shielded energy pathways. The technology aims to provide balanced and complementary energy confluences to manage noise and ensure stable power delivery in electronic circuits (’444 Patent, Abstract).
- Asserted Claims: The complaint alleges infringement of the patent generally (Compl. ¶65).
- Accused Features: The accused features are microprocessors and personal computers containing them (Compl. ¶¶65-68).
III. The Accused Instrumentality
Product Identification
The complaint identifies specific accused products as the Intel Core i7-950 microprocessor, the Apple iMac 27" Model A1312 personal computer (containing an Intel Core i3 processor), and the Hewlett-Packard TouchSmart 610 Series personal computer (Compl. ¶¶14-16, 27-29, 40-42, 53-55, 66-68). More broadly, the suit targets Defendants' "microprocessors and products that contain microprocessors" (Compl. ¶13).
Functionality and Market Context
The complaint identifies the accused instrumentalities by name but does not provide specific technical details regarding their internal circuit architecture, power distribution networks, or energy conditioning features. The allegations are based on the general function of these products as microprocessors and personal computers (Compl. ¶¶13-16). No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.
IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations
The complaint alleges that the accused microprocessors and the computers containing them infringe the patents-in-suit but does not map any specific product features to the limitations of any asserted claims. The following chart summarizes the infringement theory for the lead patent based on the general allegations.
’249 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| An energy conditioning interposer component assembly comprising: a plurality of common electrodes... [and] at least one pair of differential electrodes... | The complaint alleges on information and belief that the accused microprocessors and computers contain multi-layer circuit structures for energy conditioning. | ¶13, ¶14 | col. 37:2-8 |
| wherein said first differential electrode is stacked above said central common electrode and said second differential electrode is stacked below said central common electrode... | The complaint’s general infringement allegation suggests that the internal architecture of the accused products includes the specific stacked electrode arrangement. | ¶13, ¶14 | col. 37:9-14 |
| a material having predetermined electrical properties... preventing direct electrical connection between said plurality of common electrodes and said first and second differential electrodes... | The complaint suggests the accused products contain dielectric or insulating material separating the various conductive electrode layers as required by the claim. | ¶13, ¶14 | col. 37:16-24 |
’227 Patent Infringement Allegations
| Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) | Alleged Infringing Functionality | Complaint Citation | Patent Citation |
|---|---|---|---|
| An integral capacitor comprising: a power plane having a power surface and a power periphery; a first ground plane having a first ground surface and a first ground periphery... | The complaint alleges on information and belief that the accused microprocessors and computers contain power and ground planes for distributing electrical energy. | ¶26, ¶27 | col. 37:7-14 |
| the first ground periphery extending at least a second distance from the power periphery, the second distance being at least larger than N times the first distance... | The complaint’s general infringement allegation suggests that the geometric layout of the power and ground planes in the accused products meets the specific dimensional limitations of the claim. | ¶26, ¶27 | col. 37:18-22 |
Identified Points of Contention
- Evidentiary Question: A central point of contention may be the factual basis for the complaint's "information and belief" allegations. The complaint does not present evidence, such as from circuit analysis or reverse engineering, to demonstrate that the internal, complex structures of the accused microprocessors practice the specific layered architectures required by the asserted claims.
- Scope Question: For the ’249 Patent, a dispute may arise over whether the internal structures of an integrated circuit or its package can be considered an "interposer component assembly," a term the patent specification often describes as a separate substrate for connecting an IC to a printed circuit board.
V. Key Claim Terms for Construction
For the ’249 Patent
- The Term: "interposer component assembly"
- Context and Importance: The infringement case may turn on whether this term can be construed to cover the internal structures of an integrated circuit package or die. Defendants may argue the accused products are integrated circuits, not separate "interposers" as described in the patent.
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification states the invention is for "energy conditioning as it relates to integrated circuit (IC) device packaging or direct mounted IC modules," which may support a construction that includes structures integrated within a processor package (’249 Patent, col. 1:37-39).
- Intrinsic Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The abstract describes the invention as an "interposer substrate for interconnecting between active electronic componentry," and the background discusses connecting ICs to a "printed circuit board" or "other substrates," suggesting a component that is physically separate from the IC itself (’249 Patent, Abstract; col. 2:1-3).
For the ’227 Patent
- The Term: "the first ground periphery extending at least a second distance from the power periphery"
- Context and Importance: This term recites a specific geometric and dimensional relationship between the ground and power planes. Infringement will depend on whether the physical layout of the accused products meets this precise structural limitation.
- Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation: The patent does not provide an explicit definition but describes this structural offset as a key part of creating a "Faraday cage-like" shield that overlaps and contains the differential pathways to suppress EMI (’227 Patent, col. 22:45-50). Figure 3 visually depicts this offset, where the edge of the common conductive pathway (805) extends beyond the edge of the differential pathway (803), creating an offset distance (814). This suggests the term requires a specific, measurable physical extension (’227 Patent, Fig. 3).
VI. Other Allegations
Indirect Infringement
The complaint includes allegations of contributory and induced infringement for all asserted patents (e.g., Compl. ¶13, ¶26). However, it does not plead specific facts to support the requisite knowledge and intent, such as identifying instructional materials or other affirmative acts of encouragement.
Willful Infringement
The complaint alleges willful infringement against Defendant Intel for all five patents (e.g., Compl. ¶22, ¶35, ¶48, ¶61, ¶74). The stated basis is that Intel "has been aware" of the patents and "has known or should have known of the risk of its actions." The complaint does not allege any facts supporting pre-suit knowledge, such as a notice letter or prior dealings.
VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case
- A central issue will be one of evidentiary sufficiency: what factual basis will Plaintiff provide to support its "information and belief" allegations that the highly complex and proprietary internal structures of Defendants' microprocessors embody the specific multi-layer electrode arrangements recited in the patents-in-suit?
- A key legal question will be one of claim scope: can terms such as "interposer component assembly," which the patents often describe as a separate substrate connecting an IC to a board, be construed broadly enough to read on structures that are integrated within the microprocessor package itself?
- A dispositive technical question will be one of structural correspondence: does the physical layout of the power and ground planes within the accused products meet the specific geometric and dimensional limitations required by claims, such as the requirement in the ’227 patent that the ground plane periphery extends a specified distance beyond the power plane periphery?