Ericsson Inc. et al. v. Procomm International Pte. Ltd.

Petition

Petition summary

Prosecution History analysis

Examiner Search analysis

Invalidity Framework analysis

## 1. Case Identification
- Case Number: [IPR2024-01454](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454)
- Patent #: [7,724,521](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/patent/7724521)
- Filed: December 31, 2024
- Petitioner(s): [Ericsson Inc.](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/ericsson-inc), and [Cellco Partnership](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/cellco-partnership) d/b/a Verizon Wireless
- Patent Owner(s): [Procomm International PTE. LTD.](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/party/procomm-intl-pte-ltd)
- Challenged Claims: 1-5 and 14-20

## 2. Patent Overview
- Title: Systems and Methods for Venturi Fan-Assisted Cooling
- Brief Description: The [’521 patent](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1001) discloses systems and methods for cooling electronic components, such as telecommunications equipment, housed within a sealed enclosure. The invention uses a fan to generate a first airflow across the convective openings of a heatsink, which creates a Venturi effect to draw a second, heated airflow through and away from the heatsink.

## 3. Grounds for Unpatentability

#### Ground 1: Claims 1, 3-5, and 14-16 are obvious over Sterner
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** Patent 7,028,753 (“[Sterner](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1004)”) in view of the knowledge of a person of ordinary skill in the art (POSA).
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** Petitioner argued that [Sterner](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1004) discloses all limitations of independent claims 1 and 14. [Sterner](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1004) teaches a cooling apparatus for an electronic device (e.g., a notebook computer) that uses a fan and an air duct (a Venturi chamber) to create a Venturi effect. A first airflow is drawn by the fan through the air duct, creating a low-pressure region at a Venturi vent. This low pressure draws a second, heated airflow from a heatsink (a heatpipe coupled to a second duct) through the Venturi vent. This structure directly maps to the claimed cooling unit with a fan shroud, Venturi chamber, and separate inlets for heated and ambient air (claim 1) and the corresponding method steps (claim 14).
    - **Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds):** For dependent claim 3 (adding a backup fan), Petitioner argued it was well-known and desirable for a POSA to include redundant components like backup fans in critical cooling systems to ensure reliability, a simple design choice.
    - **Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds):** A POSA would expect success in adding a backup fan, as it was a common practice for providing redundancy in electronic cooling systems.

#### Ground 2: Claims 1-2, 4-5, and 14-17 are obvious over Aakalu
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** Patent 5,894,407 (“[Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005)”) in view of the knowledge of a POSA.
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** Petitioner contended that [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005), which was considered during prosecution, renders the claims obvious and that the Examiner erred in allowing the claims over it. [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) discloses an outdoor electronics enclosure with heatsinks and a solar shield. When fans operate, a first airflow is drawn through top ventilators across the top of the heatsink channels. Petitioner asserted this creates a Venturi effect that draws a second, heated airflow up through the heatsink channels. This arrangement allegedly meets the limitations of claims 1 and 14, including the limitation added during prosecution ("wherein the first airflow does not flow into the one or more convective openings of the heatsink"), which Petitioner argued [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) inherently discloses.
    - **Key Aspects:** A central part of this ground is the argument that the Examiner incorrectly concluded [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) was deficient. Petitioner provided a detailed re-interpretation of [Aakalu's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) airflow, arguing that its structure and function are analogous to the [’521 patent](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1001) and that a POSA would have understood the Venturi principles at play. For claim 2 (offset fan for natural circulation), Petitioner argued [Aakalu's](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) figures show the fan is offset from the primary natural convection path.

#### Ground 3: Claims 3 and 18-20 are obvious over Aakalu in view of Jones
  - **Prior Art Relied Upon:** [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) (’407 patent) and Patent 6,104,003 (“[Jones](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1006)”).
  - **Core Argument for this Ground:**
    - **Prior Art Mapping:** This ground builds on [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) by adding teachings from [Jones](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1006) to arrive at claims requiring specific control and redundancy features. While [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) teaches a cooling system with fans, it does not explicitly disclose operating a fan based on a predetermined temperature (claim 18) or using one fan as a backup for another (claim 3). [Jones](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1006), which addresses cooling for outdoor telecommunications cabinets, explicitly teaches both: a thermal controller that operates fans based on sensed temperatures and a plurality of fans where one is preferably held in reserve as a redundant backup.
    - **Motivation to Combine (for §103 grounds):** A POSA would combine [Aakalu’s](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005) cooling structure with [Jones’s](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1006) control and redundancy features to improve the system's reliability and power efficiency. Both references address the known problem of cooling electronics in outdoor environments, making the combination logical to prevent equipment damage from overheating or primary fan failure.
    - **Expectation of Success (for §103 grounds):** A POSA would have a high expectation of success, as implementing temperature-based control and redundant fans were standard, well-understood design principles for enhancing the robustness of electronic cooling systems.

## 4. Arguments Regarding Discretionary Denial
- Petitioner argued that discretionary denial under §325(d) is unwarranted. For the challenge over [Aakalu](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1005), Petitioner asserted that it is presenting new arguments and evidence demonstrating examiner error. For the challenge over [Sterner](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1004), Petitioner noted that while [Sterner](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1004) was listed in an IDS, the Examiner never discussed or substantively reviewed it, so it was not materially considered during prosecution.
- Petitioner also argued against discretionary denial under Fintiv. It asserted that the co-pending district court case is in its early stages with minimal investment. Crucially, Petitioner stipulated that it would not pursue the same grounds in the district court if the IPR is instituted. Petitioner contended that the merits of the petition are particularly strong and compelling, weighing in favor of institution.

## 5. Relief Requested
- Petitioner requested the institution of an inter partes review and the cancellation of claims 1-5 and 14-20 of the [’521 patent](https://ai-lab.exparte.com/case/ptab/IPR2024-01454/doc/1001) as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103.

Ericsson & Verizon target Venturi fan cooling patent for telecom gear, citing Sterner & Aakalu art in 3 obviousness grounds against 12 claims.

IPR2024-01454

Ericsson Inc. v. Procomm International Pte. Ltd.