PTAB

IPR2025-00665

Stanley Black & Decker Inc v. Viking ARM As

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Lowering Mechanism for a Hand Held Jacking Tool
  • Brief Description: The ’473 patent discloses a hand-held jacking tool featuring a conventional caulking gun-style lifting mechanism. The invention is directed to an incremental lowering mechanism that allows an operator to control the downward movement of the jack's frame in a controlled, adjustable, and stepwise manner, purportedly solving the problem of a load falling uncontrollably when a conventional jack is released.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Claims 1-3 are obvious over Gruber in view of Braselmann

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Gruber (German Patent Specification Pub. No. DE 101 27 718 A1) and Braselmann (Patent 2,820,608).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner argued that Gruber, which was not considered during prosecution, disclosed a nearly identical hand-held jacking tool with a caulking gun mechanism, a complete release lever, and an incremental lowering mechanism. However, Petitioner contended that Gruber’s incremental lowering mechanism still posed a risk of unintended, uncontrolled descent. Braselmann, an analogous art reference, taught an improved, safer, and more adjustable incremental lowering mechanism that specifically solved this problem by ensuring that a lowering plate engages the jacking shaft before a holding plate disengages, thereby preventing freefall. Petitioner asserted that combining Braselmann’s safer lowering mechanism with Gruber’s otherwise complete jacking tool renders the claims of the ’473 patent obvious. Gruber provided the base jack with its jacking frame, shaft, biased jacking and holding plates, and a release lever. Braselmann provided the key elements of the claimed lowering mechanism, including the lowering plate positioned atop the holding plate and actuated by a thumb-operable pushing lever via a hinge and a pivot structure (cam).
    • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Braselmann's teachings with Gruber's jack to improve its safety and functionality. A POSITA would recognize the risk of uncontrolled load descent inherent in Gruber’s design and would look to known solutions in the same field. Braselmann explicitly taught a mechanism to prevent "rapid and uncontrolled descent," providing a clear reason to incorporate its safer, adjustable lowering system into Gruber’s jack. This combination represented a simple substitution of one known element (Gruber's lowering mechanism) with another (Braselmann's safer mechanism) to obtain predictable results.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success in this combination. Both Gruber and Braselmann relate to mechanical hand-held jacks that operate using the same fundamental caulking gun principles. Incorporating Braselmann's plate-based lowering mechanism into Gruber’s similar plate-based system was a straightforward mechanical integration for which success would be expected.

4. Key Claim Construction Positions

Petitioner argued that the Board could find the claims obvious without resolving claim construction disputes, but proposed constructions for two key terms.

  • "pivot structure" (Claim 1):
    • Petitioner's Construction: "A structure having a fixed pivot point around which the pushing lever pivots."
    • Relevance: Petitioner argued this construction is supported by the patent's specification, which describes and illustrates a fixed pivot point (P2) and emphasizes the need to calculate fixed distances for the mechanism to operate correctly. This construction would distinguish from Braselmann's use of a sliding cam. However, Petitioner argued that even if the term were construed more broadly to include a sliding cam (Patent Owner's apparent position in parallel European proceedings), the combination would still be obvious. A POSITA would have found it obvious to either use Braselmann's cam or modify it to a fixed pivot for the smaller lever stroke in the modified Gruber jack.
  • "beside" (Claim 2):
    • Petitioner's Construction: "Laterally adjacent."
    • Relevance: Petitioner contended that the claims establish a clear 3D reference frame (e.g., "above," "on top of," "downwards," "rear end"), implying that "beside" refers to a specific lateral direction, not general proximity (i.e., "nearby"). A lateral arrangement of the pushing and release levers is also ergonomically superior for thumb operation, as described in the specification. Petitioner asserted claim 2 is obvious under either construction but that "laterally adjacent" is the correct interpretation. A POSITA would find it obvious to place the levers "nearby" for convenience, and would also find it obvious to arrange them laterally for improved safety and ergonomics.

5. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-3 of Patent 11,554,473 as unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. §103.