DCT

2:21-cv-00147

Switch Ltd v. Lunavi Inc

Log In

I. Executive Summary and Procedural Information

  • Parties & Counsel:
  • Case Identification: [Switch, Ltd.](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/switch-co-ltd) v. [Lunavi, Inc.](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/lunavi-inc), 2:21-cv-00147, D. Wyo., 10/08/2021
  • Venue Allegations: Venue is alleged to be proper in the District of Wyoming because Defendants have committed acts of patent infringement and maintain a regular and established place of business within the district.
  • Core Dispute: Plaintiff alleges that Defendants’ data center facilities infringe four patents related to high-efficiency data center cooling and heat containment architectures.
  • Technical Context: The technology addresses thermal management in high-density data centers by physically separating hot air exhausted from servers from the cool air supplied to them, a critical factor for improving energy efficiency and operational performance.
  • Key Procedural History: The complaint alleges pre-suit knowledge of the patented technology, stemming from a September 2015 tour of Plaintiff’s facilities by an executive of the Defendants who allegedly observed the "patent pending data center technology." Plaintiff also alleges sending a notice letter on March 11, 2020, identifying three of the four patents-in-suit.

Case Timeline

Date Event
2007-06-14 Earliest Priority Date for ’643, ’455, ’796, and ’939 Patents
2013-09-03 U.S. Patent No. 8,523,643 Issues
2015-09-01 Defendant executive allegedly tours Plaintiff's facilities
2017-10-10 U.S. Patent No. 9,788,455 Issues
2019-01-08 U.S. Patent No. 10,178,796 Issues
2019-07-16 U.S. Patent No. 10,356,939 Issues
2020-03-11 Plaintiff sends notice letter to Defendant Lunavi
2021-10-08 First Amended Complaint filed

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

U.S. Patent No. 10,356,939 - "Electronic Equipment Data Center or Co-Location Facility Designs and Methods of Making and Using the Same"

  • Issued: July 16, 2019
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent's background section describes the technical challenge of managing heat generated by electronic equipment in data centers, where inefficient cooling systems can mix hot and cold air, wasting energy and limiting server density (’939 Patent, col. 1:24-52).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention proposes a structural arrangement for "hot aisle containment." Server cabinets are positioned back-to-back, creating a confined "hot aisle" that receives heated exhaust air (’939 Patent, col. 4:1-4). A "thermal shield" extends upward from the tops of the cabinets, forming a contained "hot air path" that functions like a chimney, directing the rising hot air away from the "cold aisles" where cool air is supplied to the server intakes (’939 Patent, Abstract; Fig. 1C). This physical separation of airflows aims to improve thermal management efficiency.
    • Technical Importance: This design approach enables higher-density server deployments and improves Power Usage Effectiveness (PUE), a key industry metric for data center energy efficiency (Compl. ¶¶ 17-18).
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • The complaint asserts infringement of at least independent Claim 1 (Compl. ¶35).
    • The essential elements of Claim 1 include:
      • A cluster of cabinets in two separated, back-to-back rows forming a hot aisle enclosure area and a cold aisle.
      • A plurality of support brackets along each row of cabinets.
      • At least one closure element at an end of the rows, perpendicular to the rows, to establish the hot aisle enclosure area.
      • A thermal shield with panels extending upward from the cabinets to form a hot air path, supported by the brackets and forming a contiguous wall that contains "substantially all" of the heated air.
      • An air conditioning system that delivers cold air to the cold aisle through a cold air duct.
    • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 10,178,796 - "Electronic Equipment Data Center or Co-Location Facility Designs and Methods of Making and Using the Same"

  • Issued: January 8, 2019
  • The Invention Explained:
    • Problem Addressed: The patent addresses the need for systematic apparatus and methods for partitioning airflows in data centers to manage heat efficiently (’796 Patent, col. 2:1-6).
    • The Patented Solution: The invention describes a structure for managing heat that also uses back-to-back cabinet rows to establish a hot aisle and a thermal shield to contain the hot air above it (’796 Patent, col. 8:50-67). A key aspect of this patent is its focus on the complete air circuit, explicitly claiming a "warm air path" above the hot air area for routing heated air to air conditioning systems, and a "cool air path" for delivering cooled air from those systems back to the cold aisle (’796 Patent, col. 9:1-6). The claims also require support brackets for the thermal shield.
    • Technical Importance: The claimed invention provides a structural framework for a closed-loop air circulation system that physically separates and defines the pathways for both warm and cool air, enhancing thermal management control.
  • Key Claims at a Glance:
    • The complaint asserts infringement of at least independent Claim 12 (Compl. ¶54).
    • The essential elements of Claim 12 include:
      • A cluster of cabinets in two separated, back-to-back rows to establish a hot aisle enclosure area and a portion of a cold aisle.
      • A thermal shield extending upward from the cabinets, providing a contiguous wall to trap "substantially all" of the heated air.
      • A warm air path above the hot air area, allowing heated air to flow to one or more air conditioning systems.
      • A cool air path between the air conditioning system(s) and the cold aisle for delivering cool air.
      • One or more support brackets along each row of cabinets that support the thermal shield.
    • The complaint does not explicitly reserve the right to assert dependent claims for this patent.

U.S. Patent No. 9,788,455 - "Electronic Equipment Data Center or Co-Location Facility Designs and Methods of Making and Using the Same"

  • Issued: October 10, 2017
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’455 Patent describes a facility for cooling electronic equipment using "cage cabinets" arranged in back-to-back rows to form a hot aisle (’455 Patent, col. 12:20-31). The invention specifies a thermal shield forming a "warm exhaust channel" above the cabinets, which connects to a "warm air escape channel" bounded by a ceiling. This channel feeds heated air to air conditioning units, completing a structured, contained path for heat removal (’455 Patent, Abstract).
  • Asserted Claims: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶75).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges that Defendants' data centers in Cheyenne and Orangeburg infringe by employing a facility with back-to-back cabinets, a thermal shield creating a warm exhaust channel, and a warm air escape channel that directs air to an air conditioning system (Compl. ¶¶ 77, 82-84).

U.S. Patent No. 8,523,643 - "Electronic Equipment Data Center or Co-Location Facility Designs and Methods of Making and Using the Same"

  • Issued: September 3, 2013
  • Technology Synopsis: The ’643 Patent describes a data center facility with distinct "internal" and "external" areas separated by an exterior load wall (’643 Patent, col. 15:11-17). The invention claims a system where air conditioning units are in the external area. A hot air containment chamber in the internal area directs hot air into a "warm air escape gap" (e.g., a ceiling plenum), which connects through openings in the exterior wall to the external AC units. Cooled air is returned via ducts that also pass through the exterior wall (’643 Patent, col. 15:46-63).
  • Asserted Claims: Claim 1 (Compl. ¶95).
  • Accused Features: The complaint alleges infringement by Defendants’ data centers that maintain air conditioning units outside the main building and use warm air connectors and cool air ducts that pass through the building’s exterior wall (Compl. ¶97). A promotional video still allegedly shows such external air conditioning units (Compl. ¶97, image on p. 37).

III. The Accused Instrumentality

  • Product Identification: The accused instrumentalities are data center facilities operated by the Defendants, specifically identifying locations in Cheyenne, Wyoming, and Orangeburg, New York (Compl. ¶¶ 2-4, 37, 42).
  • Functionality and Market Context: The complaint alleges the accused facilities are built in a modular fashion that includes a "heat containment cabinet layout" (Compl. ¶28). This layout is alleged to create a "fully contained hot aisle" by arranging server cabinets in parallel, back-to-back rows (Compl. ¶28, ¶37). The facilities allegedly use "Chimney Pods," described as thermal shields with panels extending upward from the cabinets, to channel hot air vertically (Compl. ¶28, ¶36). This hot air is then directed to an air conditioning system, which delivers cool air back to the cold aisles at the front of the cabinets (Compl. ¶38). The complaint presents a diagram from a promotional video depicting this hot aisle/cold aisle configuration with directional arrows for hot and cool air paths (Compl. ¶37, image on p. 10). The facilities are also alleged to utilize "Exterior Wall Penetrating HVAC systems" (Compl. ¶28).

IV. Analysis of Infringement Allegations

'939 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 1) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
at least one cluster of cabinets formed by two separated rows of cabinets such that the rows of cabinets are positioned in a cabinet back to cabinet back configuration to form a hot aisle enclosure area... Defendants’ data centers arrange cabinets into structures formed from two separated rows of cabinets in a back-to-back configuration, establishing a "hot aisle" enclosure area. ¶37 col. 4:1-12
a plurality of support brackets disposed along each of the two rows of the at least one cluster of cabinets; The accused facilities include support brackets, identified as frame elements for the panels above the cabinets, disposed along the rows. ¶41 col. 5:58-64
at least one closure element located at an end of the rows of cabinets, such that the at least one closure element is perpendicular to the two separated rows... A perpendicular closure element, such as a wall with a door, is located at an end of the two rows to establish the hot aisle enclosure area. ¶37 col. 14:35-42
a thermal shield comprising a plurality of panels extending upward from the top of the cabinets to form a hot air path... forming a contiguous wall... to cause substantially all of the heated air... to be contained... The accused facilities have a thermal shield, including semi-transparent panels supported by brackets, extending upward from the cabinets to form a hot air path and a contiguous wall that contains the heated air. ¶36 col. 5:29-37
an air conditioning system delivering cold air to the cold aisle through a cold air duct. The accused data centers include an air conditioning system that delivers cold air to the cold aisle via a cold air duct, as shown by blue arrows in promotional materials. ¶38 col. 4:45-50

Identified Points of Contention:

  • Scope Questions: A central question may be the construction of "substantially all." The infringement allegation hinges on whether the accused thermal shields contain "substantially all of the heated air." Defendants may argue that their systems permit a material amount of air leakage, falling outside the claim's scope.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint relies on promotional diagrams to evidence the "air conditioning system delivering cold air... through a cold air duct" (Compl. ¶38, image on p. 10). A key factual dispute may arise over how the actual, physical HVAC system operates and whether it meets the specific functional requirements of a "cold air duct" as recited in the claim.

'796 Patent Infringement Allegations

Claim Element (from Independent Claim 12) Alleged Infringing Functionality Complaint Citation Patent Citation
at least one cluster of cabinets disposed in two separated rows of cabinets are positioned in a back-to-back configuration to establish a hot aisle enclosure area... Defendants' facilities configure cabinets in back-to-back rows to establish a hot aisle enclosure area. ¶56 col. 8:51-57
a thermal shield extending upward from the cabinets to form a hot air area by providing a contiguous wall... to trap heated air... and cause substantially all of the heated air... to be contained... The facilities use a thermal shield (semi-transparent panels) extending upward to form a hot air area and a contiguous wall that contains the heated air. ¶61 col. 8:58-67
a warm air path disposed above the hot air area, the warm air path allowing heated air to flow from the hot air area to one or more air conditioning systems; The accused data centers include a warm air path that allows heated air to flow to an air conditioning system. ¶57 col. 9:1-3
a cool air path between the one or more air conditioning systems and the cold aisle, the cool air path delivering cool air from the air conditioning system to the cold aisle; The facilities include a cool air path delivering cool air from the air conditioning system to the cold aisle. ¶57 col. 9:4-6
one or more support brackets disposed along each of the two separated rows of the at least one cluster of cabinets which support the thermal shield. The accused facilities include support brackets along the rows which support the thermal shield, evidenced by a photograph of the overhead structure. ¶60 col. 9:7-10

Identified Points of Contention:

  • Scope Questions: The interpretation of "warm air path" and "cool air path" will be critical. The complaint appears to identify open plenum spaces and general airflow patterns as meeting these limitations. A dispute may arise over whether the term "path" requires a more defined, enclosed structure like a duct, versus a less-defined channel.
  • Technical Questions: The complaint identifies overhead framework as the claimed "support brackets" (Compl. ¶60, image on p. 20). The functional relationship between this framework and the thermal shield will be a key factual question: does the framework actually "support the thermal shield" as required by the claim, or does it serve an unrelated structural purpose?

V. Key Claim Terms for Construction

  • The Term: "thermal shield" (’939 Patent, Claim 1; ’796 Patent, Claim 12)

  • Context and Importance: This is the primary structure for achieving the claimed heat containment. The infringement analysis for both lead patents depends on whether the "semi-transparent panels" in the accused facilities (Compl. ¶41) meet the definition of a "thermal shield." Practitioners may focus on whether the term implies specific material properties (e.g., thermal insulation) or merely a structural barrier.

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The specification describes the shield as being made of "structurally sound material, including but not limited to steel, a composite, or a plastic," suggesting its primary function is structural separation rather than thermal insulation (’939 Patent, col. 5:30-33).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The term "thermal" itself suggests a heat-related function beyond simple physical separation. Further, figures like Fig. 2A depict solid, opaque panels mounted in a specific manner on brackets, which could be argued to define the scope of the term (’939 Patent, Fig. 2A).

  • The Term: "warm air path" (’796 Patent, Claim 12)

  • Context and Importance: This term defines the conduit for exhausting hot air. The infringement read depends on whether the open plenum space above the accused cabinets qualifies as a "path."

  • Intrinsic Evidence for Interpretation:

    • Evidence for a Broader Interpretation: The claim language describes the path functionally as "allowing heated air to flow from the hot air area to one or more air conditioning systems," without specifying a particular structure (’796 Patent, col. 9:1-3).
    • Evidence for a Narrower Interpretation: The word "path" itself may imply a defined or bounded channel, rather than an open, unconfined space. Other parts of the patent family refer to a "warm air escape channel" or "warm exhaust channel," which could be used to argue that "path" requires a more defined structure than a general plenum (’455 Patent, col. 12:20-25).

VI. Other Allegations

  • Indirect Infringement: While not pleaded as separate counts, the complaint alleges that individual defendant James Todd Raymond "directed 1547 and/or Lunavi to build the facilities and/or structures accused of infringement" (Compl. ¶9), and that he is "vicariously liable" for the corporate defendants' infringement (Compl. ¶116-119). These allegations may form the basis for a theory of induced infringement.
  • Willful Infringement: The complaint alleges willful infringement based on both pre-suit and post-suit knowledge (Compl. ¶50, ¶71). Pre-suit knowledge is alleged to arise from a September 2015 tour where Defendant Raymond allegedly "observed the physical infrastructure of Switch's patent pending data center technology," and from a March 11, 2020 notice letter sent by Switch to Lunavi (Compl. ¶27, ¶29, ¶47-48). The complaint further alleges that Defendants acted "intentionally to copy and mimic Switch's physical infrastructure" (Compl. ¶28).

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

  • A core issue will be one of definitional scope: can terms such as "thermal shield" and "warm air path," as defined in the patent specifications, be construed to cover the specific structures—allegedly semi-transparent panels and an open overhead plenum—used in the accused data centers?
  • A key evidentiary question will be one of functional performance: beyond promotional materials, what evidence will demonstrate how the accused facilities actually operate? Specifically, does the accused "thermal shield" contain "substantially all" of the heated air as required by the claims, or is there a material difference in technical function?
  • A central question for damages will be one of intent: will the plaintiff be able to prove its allegations that Defendants had pre-suit knowledge of the technology from a 2015 facility tour and subsequently engaged in intentional copying, which would be critical for a finding of willful infringement?