DCT

7:26-cv-00005

Vicor Corp v. Monolithic Power Systems Inc

Log In
Key Events
Complaint

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: 7:26-cv-00005, W.D. Tex., 01/09/2026
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper as most defendants are foreign corporations subject to suit in any judicial district. For the domestic defendant, Monolithic Power Systems, Inc., venue is based on alleged acts of infringement and a regular and established place of business within the Western District of Texas.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that power converters manufactured by Monolithic Power Systems and incorporated into high-performance computing systems by Wistron and Quanta infringe a patent related to a non-isolated power distribution architecture.
  • Technical Context: The technology concerns high-efficiency, high-density power conversion modules essential for powering advanced processors in server motherboards and artificial intelligence (AI) accelerator cards.
  • Key Procedural History: No prior litigation, licensing history, or post-grant proceedings related to the patent-in-suit are mentioned in the complaint.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2012-00-00 Quanta Cloud Technology launched as a subsidiary
2013-07-02 U.S. Patent No. 12,395,087 Priority Date
2025-08-19 U.S. Patent No. 12,395,087 Issue Date
2026-01-09 Complaint Filing Date

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

U.S. Patent No. 12,395,087 - *"Power Distribution Architecture with Series-Connected Bus Converter"*

The patent-in-suit is U.S. Patent No. 12,395,087, issued August 19, 2025 (’087 Patent).

The Invention Explained

  • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses conventional Intermediate Bus Architecture ("IBA") systems where a bus converter provides voltage transformation and galvanic isolation before power is delivered to downstream regulators (Compl. ¶51; ’087 Patent, col. 1:24-44). This traditional approach can have inherent inefficiencies and limit power density.
  • The Patented Solution: The invention discloses a non-isolated power distribution architecture where the input and output circuits of a bus converter are connected in series across the primary power source (’087 Patent, Abstract). This series connection reduces the voltage that the converter itself must process (VIN = VS - VO), which in turn can reduce component stress and improve overall system efficiency and power density (Compl. ¶51; ’087 Patent, col. 5:8-16, col. 6:30-39). The patent’s Figure 2 illustrates this core series-connected concept, contrasting it with the prior art (’087 Patent, Fig. 2).
  • Technical Importance: This architecture aims to enable superior power system density and efficiency, which are critical metrics in advanced computing applications such as datacenter servers and AI accelerators (Compl. ¶50).

Key Claims at a Glance

  • The complaint asserts independent claims 1, 68, 85, and 89, along with numerous dependent claims (Compl. ¶56).
  • Independent Claim 1 (Apparatus):
    • A bus converter circuit with first, second, and common terminals for converting power between a first voltage (V1) and a second voltage (V2).
    • The input and output are galvanically connected.
    • The converter uses an "essentially fixed voltage transformation ratio, K."
    • The circuit includes a transformer, a plurality of switches, and a controller.
    • The controller operates the switches in cycles, each having first and second power transfer intervals of essentially equal duration.
    • During these intervals, the circuit forms series resonant circuits that include a capacitor.
    • The circuit is configured to achieve Zero Voltage Switching (ZVS) for a "first ZVS switch" and a "second ZVS switch."
  • The complaint reserves the right to assert additional claims, including dependent claims (Compl. ¶56).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

Product Identification

The primary accused product is the Monolithic Power Systems (MPS) power converter, model MPC12109-F-54-1000-0380 (Compl. ¶3, ¶54). The complaint further accuses circuit board assemblies and computing systems that incorporate this converter, including servers manufactured by Wistron and Quanta that utilize AMD MI3XX series GPU boards (Compl. ¶61-62, ¶66-67).

Functionality and Market Context

  • The accused MPS component is a power converter designed for use in high-performance computing applications (Compl. ¶1, ¶62). The complaint provides a photograph showing the accused MPS converter integrated onto an AMD MI325X GPU accelerator board, which is then incorporated into servers sold by the Wistron and Quanta defendants (Compl. p. 23).
  • The complaint alleges these products are central to the "increased global investments in AI data center infrastructure buildout," positioning them in a commercially significant market (Compl. ¶16).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

The complaint references an exemplary claim chart in Exhibit 2, which was not provided with the analyzed documents; therefore, a claim chart summary cannot be constructed (Compl. ¶56, ¶59). The narrative infringement theory presented in the complaint is that the MPS MPC12109-F-54-1000-0380 power converter, and the server systems from Wistron and Quanta containing it, directly infringe the ’087 Patent (Compl. ¶56, ¶61, ¶66). The complaint alleges that these products function as a non-isolated "bus converter" that practices the elements of the asserted claims, including operating with a fixed voltage ratio in a power distribution architecture consistent with the patent's teachings (Compl. ¶50, ¶56). The infringement allegations cover both literal infringement and infringement under the doctrine of equivalents (Compl. ¶56).

Identified Points of Contention

  • Scope Questions: A central question may be whether the accused MPS power converter, as implemented on a GPU accelerator card within a server, functions as the claimed "bus converter circuit" within the specific power distribution architecture described in the patent. The defense may argue that the server's power delivery system does not map onto the patent's two-stage "Intermediate Bus Architecture" context, which features distinct bus converters and downstream regulators (’087 Patent, Fig. 1; col. 1:24-34).
  • Technical Questions: The complaint alleges infringement but does not provide technical details on the internal operation of the accused MPS converter. A key factual dispute will likely concern whether the accused device operates with an "essentially fixed voltage transformation ratio" and utilizes the specific Zero Voltage Switching (ZVS) methodology required by the asserted claims.

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "bus converter circuit" (Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: This term defines the entire apparatus. Its construction will determine whether the patent applies broadly to various power converters or is limited to the specific "Intermediate Bus Architecture" context described in the specification. Practitioners may focus on this term because the defendants could argue their component is a general-purpose power module, not a "bus converter" specifically designed for the patented architecture.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The body of claim 1 defines the circuit by its components (transformer, switches, controller) and function (converting power with a fixed ratio), without explicitly limiting it to a particular end-system architecture.
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent’s background section and Figure 1 consistently frame the "bus converter" as a component within an IBA that supplies power to separate, downstream regulators (’087 Patent, col. 1:24-44). The term may be construed as being limited to this specific two-stage power delivery context.

  • The Term: "essentially fixed voltage transformation ratio" (Claim 1)

    • Context and Importance: This limitation distinguishes the claimed invention from converters that actively regulate their output voltage by varying their transformation ratio. Infringement will depend on whether the accused MPS device operates in this "essentially fixed" manner.
    • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:
      • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The term "essentially" suggests that minor variations are permissible. The patent specification acknowledges that a bus converter "may adjust its output slightly during predetermined operating conditions" such as for in-rush current limiting (’087 Patent, col. 1:35-38).
      • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The patent emphasizes the "fixed voltage gain" of the converter as a key feature, contrasting with variable regulators (’087 Patent, col. 2:27-31). The defense may argue that any active feedback or regulation functionality in the accused device means its ratio is not "essentially fixed."

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: The complaint alleges both induced and contributory infringement against all defendants (Compl. ¶57-58, ¶63-64, ¶68-69). Inducement is based on allegations that defendants provide marketing materials and technical support that instruct customers and end-users to operate the accused products in an infringing manner, with knowledge of the patent (Compl. ¶57). Contributory infringement is based on the allegation that the accused power converters are a material part of the invention, are not staple articles of commerce, and are known to be especially made for an infringing use (Compl. ¶58).
  • Willful Infringement: Willfulness is alleged based on defendants' continued infringement after gaining knowledge of the ’087 Patent, with such knowledge established "at least from the filing of this Complaint" (Compl. Prayer for Relief ¶C).

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

  • A core issue will be one of architectural scope: does the power delivery scheme on the accused AI accelerator boards, which utilizes the MPS power converter, constitute the specific "bus converter circuit" operating within the "Intermediate Bus Architecture" claimed by the ’087 Patent, or is it a fundamentally different type of power system?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of technical operation: does the accused MPS power converter function with an "essentially fixed voltage transformation ratio" and employ the specific Zero Voltage Switching (ZVS) method recited in claim 1, or does its operational mode fall outside the claim's technical requirements? This question will likely require detailed discovery into the design and function of the accused products.