DCT

2:24-cv-00259

Valtrus Innovations Ltd v. Cyrusone LLC

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 2:24-cv-00259, E.D. Tex., 04/18/2024
  • Venue Allegations: Plaintiff alleges venue is proper in the Eastern District of Texas because Defendant maintains a regular and established place of business at three data centers located within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendant’s data centers infringe seven patents, originally developed by Hewlett Packard Enterprise, related to data center atmospheric control, cooling systems, sensor assemblies, power management, and structural organization.
  • Technical Context: The patents address technologies for improving the energy efficiency and operational management of large-scale data centers, a critical infrastructure for modern computing and internet services.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint notes that Plaintiff sent a "Notice Letter" to Defendant on March 29, 2024, which was delivered on April 1, 2024, providing a factual basis for the infringement allegations. Defendant allegedly responded on April 11, 2024, declining a meeting. This pre-suit notice is the basis for allegations of willful infringement for four of the seven asserted patents.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2002-04-17 ’277 Patent Priority Date
2002-08-02 ’287 Patent Priority Date
2002-11-26 ’179 Patent Priority Date
2004-04-06 ’277 Patent Issue Date
2004-05-28 ’870 Patent Priority Date
2004-06-29 ’490 Patent Priority Date
2005-02-15 ’287 Patent Issue Date
2005-03-01 ’179 Patent Issue Date
2006-04-18 ’870 Patent Issue Date
2008-03-04 ’490 Patent Issue Date
2009-06-25 ’967 Patent Priority Date
2010-07-12 ’855 Patent Priority Date
2011-05-10 ’967 Patent Issue Date
2016-04-12 ’855 Patent Issue Date
2024-03-29 Plaintiff sent Notice Letter to Defendant
2024-04-01 Defendant received Notice Letter
2024-04-11 Defendant responded to Notice Letter
2024-04-18 Complaint Filing Date

II. Technology and Patent(s)-in-Suit Analysis

U.S. Patent No. 6,718,277 - "Atmospheric control within a building," issued April 6, 2004 (’277 Patent)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent describes conventional data center cooling systems as inefficient because they typically operate at full capacity continuously, regardless of the actual, distributed cooling needs of the electronic equipment, resulting in "unnecessarily high operating expenses" ('277 Patent, col. 2:35-38). Existing methods for monitoring and adjusting temperature were also seen as "relatively inaccurate and unsophisticated" ('277 Patent, col. 2:38-41).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a control system that uses multiple sensors to gather atmospheric data (e.g., temperature) from various locations within a building ('277 Patent, col. 4:46-49). This data is used to generate an "empirical atmospheric map," which is then compared to a pre-defined "template atmospheric map" representing optimal conditions ('277 Patent, col. 4:49-51). By identifying "pattern differentials" (e.g., hot spots) between the two maps, the system can determine and execute corrective actions, such as varying the quantity, quality, or distribution of conditioned air, to restore the environment to the optimal state ('277 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 2).
  • Technical Importance: This approach represented a shift from brute-force, room-level cooling to a more intelligent, data-driven methodology for managing thermal environments in complex facilities like data centers.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶31).
  • Claim 1 Elements:
    • supplying a conditioned fluid inside said building;
    • sensing at least one atmospheric parameter in a plurality of locations inside said building;
    • generating an empirical atmospheric map from the results of said sensing step;
    • comparing said empirical atmospheric map to a template atmospheric map; and
    • identifying pattern differentials between said empirical and template atmospheric maps.

U.S. Patent No. 6,854,287 - "Cooling system," issued February 15, 2005 (’287 Patent)

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent targets the inefficiency of conventional data center air conditioning units that "operate at or near a maximum compressor power even when the heat load is reduced," leading to excessive energy consumption and operating costs ('287 Patent, col. 2:12-15).
  • The Patented Solution: The invention discloses a cooling system with multiple heat exchanger units (HEUs) that receive air from the room, cool it using a cooling fluid, and deliver it back to the room, often targeted at computer racks ('287 Patent, col. 2:30-35). The system's controller senses temperatures at various locations and, in response, controls either the temperature of the cooling fluid itself or the rate of cooled air delivery (e.g., by adjusting fan speeds) ('287 Patent, col. 2:39-44). A key aspect of the claimed method is the ability to "individually manipulate" the mass flow rate of cooling fluid supplied to each of the HEUs, allowing for granular, localized cooling adjustments ('287 Patent, col. 13:58-62).
  • Technical Importance: This patent describes a system for providing zoned or even rack-specific cooling control, moving beyond monolithic cooling to a more distributed and responsive architecture.

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts at least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶35).
  • Claim 1 Elements:
    • providing a plurality of heat exchanger units configured to receive air from said room and to deliver air to said room;
    • supplying said plurality of heat exchanger units with cooling fluid from an air conditioning unit;
    • cooling said received air through heat exchange with the cooling fluid in the plurality of heat exchanger units;
    • sensing temperatures at one or more locations in said room;
    • controlling at least one of the temperature of said cooling fluid and said air delivery by said plurality of heat exchanger units to said room in response to said sensed temperatures;
    • wherein the step of controlling said air delivery comprises individually manipulating a mass flow rate of the cooling fluid supplied to each of the plurality of heat exchanger units.

  • Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 6,862,179, "Partition for varying the supply of cooling fluid," issued March 1, 2005 (’179 Patent)

    • Technology Synopsis: The invention addresses localized cooling in data centers by using controllable partitions within a pressurized air plenum. By manipulating these partitions, the system can vary the volume and velocity of cooling fluid supplied to different zones, directing cooling resources where they are most needed based on the heat loads of associated server racks ('179 Patent, Abstract; col. 4:11-20).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶39).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's data center cooling systems that allegedly include a partition for varying the supply of cooling fluid (Compl. ¶39).

  • Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,031,870, "Data center evaluation using an air re-circulation index," issued April 18, 2006 (’870 Patent)

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a method for evaluating data center cooling efficiency by calculating an "index of air re-circulation" (also termed Supply Heat Index or SHI). The index is calculated based on detected inlet and outlet temperatures of heat-dissipating devices (e.g., server racks) and the temperature of the supplied cooling air, providing a quantitative measure of undesirable hot air re-circulation ('870 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶44).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's data center cooling systems and methods of operation that are alleged to evaluate data center components ('870 Patent, Abstract; Compl. ¶42, ¶44).

  • Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,339,490, "Modular sensor assembly," issued March 4, 2008 (’490 Patent)

    • Technology Synopsis: The invention provides a modular sensor assembly, comprising an elongate, flexible body with multiple addressable sensors disposed along it. This assembly is designed to be easily attached to a computer rack to sense environmental conditions at various points, with the sensor data being communicated over a common connector wire to a central system ('490 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶50).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's use of modular sensor assemblies in its data centers for sensing conditions such as temperature at a computer rack (Compl. ¶50).

  • Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 9,310,855, "Flexible data center and methods for deployment," issued April 12, 2016 (’855 Patent)

    • Technology Synopsis: This patent describes a modular and scalable approach to deploying data centers. The system is constructed from a number of standardized "blocks," where each block consists of one or more "perimeter structures" (housing server racks) and a central "connecting structure" (housing monitoring and support equipment), allowing for flexible and incremental build-out ('855 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: At least claim 8 (Compl. ¶56).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's "flexible data centers," with the complaint specifically identifying the DFW1 Data Center as an infringing instrumentality (Compl. ¶56).

  • Multi-Patent Capsule: U.S. Patent No. 7,939,967, "Multiple Power Supply Control," issued May 10, 2011 (’967 Patent)

    • Technology Synopsis: The patent discloses a redundant power supply system where two or more power supplies receive energy from independent sources. In normal operation, one supply powers the load while another is in a standby mode. If the active supply detects an anomalous condition (e.g., loss of input power), it sends an alert signal causing the standby supply to transition to a normal output mode, ensuring uninterrupted power to the electrical load ('967 Patent, Abstract).
    • Asserted Claims: At least independent claim 1 (Compl. ¶62).
    • Accused Features: Defendant's "redundant power systems" used in its U.S. data centers (Compl. ¶62).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are Defendant CyrusOne's data centers and the systems and methods used in their operation (Compl. ¶31). This includes their cooling systems, modular sensor assemblies, data center deployment methods (specifically at the DFW1 facility), and redundant power supply control systems (Compl. ¶31, ¶50, ¶56, ¶62).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges that CyrusOne operates data centers that provide colocation and related services (Compl. ¶2). The infringement allegations target the core infrastructure that enables these data centers to function, including systems for atmospheric control, thermal management, environmental sensing, power redundancy, and physical layout (Compl. ¶31, ¶35, ¶39, ¶44, ¶50, ¶56, ¶62). The complaint asserts that these infringing activities occur within the Eastern District of Texas at CyrusOne’s "DFW Data Centers" (Compl. ¶28).

No probative visual evidence provided in complaint.

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references, but does not include, exemplary claim charts for each asserted patent (Compl. ¶31, ¶35, ¶39, ¶44, ¶50, ¶56, ¶62). The narrative infringement theories are summarized below.

  • ’277 Patent Infringement Allegations

    • Narrative Summary: The complaint alleges that CyrusOne's data centers employ systems for "controlling atmospheric conditions" that perform the steps of claim 1. This suggests an accusation that Defendant's systems sense conditions at multiple locations, use that data to create a representation of the current state, compare it to a desired or optimal state, and make adjustments to the cooling systems based on the differences identified (Compl. ¶31).
    • Identified Points of Contention:
      • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether Defendant's control systems "generate" an "empirical atmospheric map" and compare it to a "template atmospheric map" as those terms are understood in the patent. The dispute could center on whether a dynamic, real-time control algorithm that adjusts cooling based on sensor feedback meets the claim's more structured requirements of creating and comparing distinct "maps."
      • Technical Questions: What evidence does the complaint provide that Defendant's system performs a comparative analysis between a measured, multi-point environmental state and a predefined optimal model, as opposed to simpler, direct feedback loops (e.g., increasing fan speed when a single sensor exceeds a threshold)?

  • ’287 Patent Infringement Allegations

    • Narrative Summary: The complaint alleges that CyrusOne's data centers use cooling systems that infringe claim 1 of the ’287 Patent. The core of this allegation appears to be that Defendant's systems use multiple heat exchanger units and can control them in a granular fashion in response to sensed temperatures, specifically by "individually manipulating a mass flow rate of the cooling fluid supplied to each" unit (Compl. ¶35; ’287 Patent, col. 13:58-62).
    • Identified Points of Contention:
      • Scope Questions: The interpretation of "individually manipulating" will be critical. Does this require control over the cooling fluid supplied to each individual heat exchanger unit, or could it be construed to cover control over distinct zones, where each zone might contain multiple units?
      • Technical Questions: What is the actual architecture of Defendant's cooling control system? Does it possess the valves, pumps, and control logic necessary to adjust the flow of cooling fluid to each HEU independently, or are controls applied more broadly across entire sections of the data center?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • ’277 Patent: "empirical atmospheric map" / "template atmospheric map"

    • Context and Importance: These terms are the cornerstone of the ’277 Patent's inventive concept. The definition will determine whether a wide range of modern, sensor-driven HVAC control systems fall within the claim scope, or if the claim is limited to systems that create and compare data structures that can formally be called "maps."
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the map as potentially comprising "temperature contours that define various isothermal regions," which could be argued to encompass any data set representing thermal conditions across an area ('277 Patent, col. 5:44-46).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent's description of using "thermal mapping software" that can "triangulate the location of the actual hot spot" and comparing the resulting map to a "master, or model thermal map" generated by CFD software may suggest that the terms require a more sophisticated, model-based comparison rather than simple threshold-based feedback ('277 Patent, col. 5:50-56; col. 6:38-54).

  • ’287 Patent: "individually manipulating"

    • Context and Importance: This term defines the required granularity of control. Its construction will be central to determining whether Defendant's system, which may control cooling on a zonal basis, infringes a claim that may require unit-by-unit control.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: A defendant might argue that "individually" can refer to groups or zones that are manipulated independently of other groups or zones, not necessarily requiring manipulation of every single component within that group. The patent refers to controlling fluid to "a plurality of HEU's" which could support a group-based reading ('287 Patent, Fig. 3).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The claim language recites manipulating the flow rate "supplied to each of the plurality of heat exchanger units" ('287 Patent, col. 13:60-62, emphasis added). Plaintiff may argue that "each" necessitates the ability to control the flow to every single unit independently of the others, as exemplified by systems with individual valves for each HEU path.

VI. Willful Infringement

  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement for the ’870, ’490, ’855, and ’967 patents (Compl. ¶45, ¶51, ¶57, ¶63). The basis for this allegation is Defendant’s alleged post-suit knowledge stemming from the "Notice Letter" delivered on April 1, 2024. The complaint asserts that despite being put on notice with a "specific factual basis for its infringement," Defendant "did not take any action to stop its infringement" (Compl. ¶43, ¶49, ¶55, ¶61).

VII. Analyst’s Conclusion: Key Questions for the Case

This case presents a broad challenge to the infrastructure of a modern data center operator, leveraging a portfolio of patents from an industry pioneer. The resolution will likely depend on the court's answers to several fundamental questions:

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: Can terms like "atmospheric map" from the ’277 Patent, conceived in the context of early 2000s software, be construed to read on the operations of modern, dynamic, and algorithm-driven environmental control systems?
  • A key factual question will be one of technical granularity: Does the accused cooling infrastructure possess the specific, component-level control required by the term "individually manipulating" in the ’287 Patent, or is there a fundamental mismatch between the claimed level of control and the actual operation of the accused systems?
  • A third central question will concern technological evolution: How will the significant advancements in data center design and management since the priority dates of these patents influence the interpretation of claim terms and the ultimate infringement analysis for the entire asserted portfolio?