PTAB

IPR2017-00839

TrickleStar LLC v. EmberTec Pty Ltd

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Power Monitoring System
  • Brief Description: The ’099 patent discloses a power management system that plugs into a mains power outlet and provides multiple controllable outlets for electrical devices. The system is designed to save energy by monitoring for signals from a user's remote control and cutting off power to devices after a period of inactivity.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Obviousness over EP'379 and '707 patent - Claim 10 is obvious over EP'379 in view of the '707 patent.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: EP'379 (European Patent Application EP2051379A1) and the '707 patent (Patent 7,034,707).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that EP'379 discloses the core elements of claim 10: an energy-saving device with electrical sockets, a switch controlled by a microprocessor, and an infrared sensor to detect remote control activity for automatically cutting power. However, EP'379 is silent on how its device connects to mains power. The '707 patent was argued to supply this missing element, as it explicitly teaches an energy management system that uses a standard electrical plug to connect to a mains power supply. Petitioner contended that combining the plug from the '707 patent with the system of EP'379 renders all limitations of claim 10 obvious.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine the references because incorporating an electrical plug is a common, simple, and necessary design choice for powering a device like that in EP'379 from a standard wall outlet. The '707 patent merely provided a well-known solution to the basic problem of providing power.
    • Expectation of Success: The combination was asserted to be simple and predictable. Adding a plug to the EP'379 device would allow it to be powered from a mains outlet without altering its fundamental energy-saving functionality based on remote control monitoring.

Ground 2: Obviousness over EP'379, EP'752, and '707 patent - Claims 8 and 11-16 are obvious over EP'379 in view of EP'752 and the '707 patent.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: EP'379 (European Patent Application EP2051379A1), EP'752 (European Patent Application EP1223752A2), and the '707 patent (Patent 7,034,707).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground builds on the combination of EP'379 and the '707 patent by adding the teachings of EP'752 to address the limitations of the dependent claims.
      • For claim 8 (power sensor to determine operational state), Petitioner argued that both EP'752 and the '707 patent teach using a power sensor to detect the power consumption of a connected appliance. This sensed data is used by a processor to determine the device’s operational state (e.g., active vs. standby) and terminate power accordingly.
      • For claim 11 (warning device), Petitioner pointed to EP'752, which discloses using a visual indicator like an LED or an acoustic buzzer to warn the user that power will be disconnected shortly.
      • For claims 12 and 14-16 (system with power monitoring and data output for adjustments), the combination of references was argued to meet all limitations. The '707 patent and EP'752 teach power sensing, and EP'379's disclosure of a USB bus provides a communication apparatus for outputting data and allowing a user to adjust control rules.
    • Motivation to Combine: Petitioner contended that all three references address the same problem of reducing power waste from consumer electronics. A POSITA seeking to improve the base system of EP'379 would have been motivated to incorporate known, desirable features from analogous systems like EP'752 and the '707 patent. Adding features like power sensing for more accurate state detection or a warning light for better usability were presented as obvious design improvements in the field of energy-saving devices.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success in integrating the well-understood components and functions from EP'752 and the '707 patent (e.g., power sensors, LEDs, associated software logic) into the EP'379 system. The result would be a predictable aggregation of the individual features, leading to a more robust and user-friendly energy-saving device.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

  • "electrical plug": Petitioner noted that the Board, in a related proceeding (IPR2016-01336), had previously construed this term to mean "the half of a connector that is normally movable and is generally attached to a cable or removable subassembly, and that is inserted in a jack, outlet, receptacle, or socket." Petitioner proceeded with its analysis based on this construction.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 8 and 10-16 of the '099 patent as unpatentable.