PTAB

IPR2019-00508

Ud Electronic Corp v. Pulse Electronics Inc

Key Events

Petition

petition

Title: Universal Connector Assembly
Brief Description: The ’473 patent discloses a modular electrical connector assembly designed to incorporate various electronic components. The assembly features a main housing with plug-receiving recesses, and accepts multiple insert assemblies that contain terminal contacts, substrates for mounting electronics, and magnetic components.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Korsunsky (Patent 6,743,047)
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Korsunsky, which was not considered during prosecution, teaches all limitations of independent claims 1 and 37. Korsunsky described a modular jack connector with an insulative housing defining upper and lower cavities for receiving plugs (the claimed “connector housing”). It disclosed insert modules containing multiple internal PCBs, including a top PCB with electronic components and conductive pathways (the claimed “top substrate”). The magnetic assembly within Korsunsky’s insert modules, comprising first and second magnetic boxes, was asserted to be the claimed “pair of insert body elements.” Finally, Petitioner contended that spaces between the conductors and the magnetic boxes in Korsunsky inherently form channels for routing wires, meeting the final limitations of the claims.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Korsunsky (Patent 6,743,047), Chen (Application # 2003/0022553)
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted that Korsunsky taught most elements of claim 16, including the connector housing, terminal insert structures, and an insert assembly with a substrate. To the extent Korsunsky was silent on an "upper and a lower polymer carrier" arranged in a mirror-image configuration, Petitioner argued Chen supplied this teaching. Chen disclosed a multiport connector with a contact pin block assembly that functions as a polymer carrier for its conductors.
- Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would combine Korsunsky with the polymer carrier structure of Chen to improve ease of assembly and provide better electrical isolation between conductors within the connector, which would prevent shorting.
- Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a high expectation of success as both references relate to modular electrical connectors and integrating a polymer carrier into a connector housing was a well-known design choice.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Korsunsky (Patent 6,743,047), Chen (Application # 2003/0022553), and Colantuono (Application # 2002/0146940)
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: This ground built upon the combination of Korsunsky and Chen from Ground 2. Petitioner argued that the additional limitation in dependent claim 18, an "indicator assembly," was taught by Colantuono. Colantuono disclosed an electrical connector with LEDs situated on a rear cover and coupled to light pipes that route light to the front of the connector for viewing. Colantuono also taught structures to minimize light bleeding between pipes, such as bridge rails or thinned surfaces, which Petitioner argued met the "optical isolation element" limitation.
- Motivation to Combine: A POSITA would be motivated to add the indicator assembly from Colantuono to the connector of Korsunsky/Chen because it was a common and desirable feature for multiport connectors to provide visual feedback on power or signal status for each port.
- Expectation of Success: The integration of LED indicators was a routine and predictable modification in the field of connector design.

Prior Art Relied Upon: Korsunsky (Patent 6,743,047) and Colantuono (Application # 2002/0146940)
Core Argument for this Ground:
- Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Korsunsky provided the base connector assembly as required by the independent claims from which claims 33, 39, and 41 depend. Colantuono was again relied upon to teach the "indicator assembly" (claim 33), the "means for providing one or more indications" (claim 39), and the "optical isolation means" (claim 41). The light pipes, LEDs, and light-isolating structures of Colantuono were mapped to these claim elements.
- Motivation to Combine: The motivation was identical to Ground 3: to add a conventional and beneficial feature (status indicators) to a standard modular connector.
- Expectation of Success: Combining these known elements from the same field to achieve a predictable result would have been straightforward for a POSITA.

Means-Plus-Function Terms: Petitioner argued that numerous claim terms should be construed under 35 U.S.C. §112, ¶ 6 as means-plus-function limitations. This was central to its invalidity arguments, as it limited the scope of these terms to the specific structures disclosed in the ’473 patent's specification.
"Optical Isolation Element" (Claims 18, 33): Petitioner contended this term, which was added during prosecution and is not explicitly defined in the specification, is a generic nonce word that should be construed as a means-plus-function term. Petitioner identified the corresponding structure in the specification as the light pipe assembly, optically conductive medium, carrier element, and shield.
"Means for..." Terms (Claims 37, 39, 41): For the multiple explicit "means for..." limitations, Petitioner identified the corresponding structures from the specification. For example, "means for receiving a modular plug" was construed as the disclosed "plug recesses 112," and "means for routing wire" was construed as the disclosed "wire channels 184."

Petitioner requests institution of IPR and cancellation of claims 1, 16, 18, 33, 37, 39, and 41 as unpatentable.