PTAB

IPR2025-01119

Belden Inc v. CommScope Technologies LLC

Log In
Key Events
Petition
petition

1. Case Identification

2. Patent Overview

  • Title: Fiber Optic Enclosure with Internal Cable Spool and Moveable Cover
  • Brief Description: The ’417 patent discloses a wall-mountable fiber optic enclosure that includes a housing with a pivoting cover. Inside, a rotatable cable spool stores and pays out fiber optic cable to manage varying lengths required for subscriber connections.

3. Grounds for Unpatentability

Ground 1: Obviousness over Hogan in view of Walters - Claims 1-6, 22-25, and 29-38 are obvious over Hogan in view of Walters.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hogan (Patent 5,109,467) and Walters (Patent 6,220,413).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: Petitioner asserted that Hogan discloses a wall-mountable fiber optic interconnect cabinet that teaches the core structural elements of the challenged claims, including a base with projecting sidewalls, a pivoting cover that provides access to the interior, and separate cable openings. Hogan further teaches fiber optic adapters spaced inwardly from the sidewalls. However, the cable storage spool in Hogan is fixedly mounted and does not rotate. Petitioner argued that Walters remedies this deficiency by disclosing a retractable cable reel apparatus with a spool that is rotatably mounted within a frame, allowing a fiber optic cable to be paid out. Walters also teaches a connector panel with adapters mounted on the reel, which rotates in unison with the spool as the cable is dispensed.
    • Motivation to Combine: A Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art (POSITA) would combine Hogan's conventional enclosure with Walters' rotatable spool to solve a well-known problem: managing variable lengths of fiber optic cable while preventing damage from manual coiling and recoiling. The ’417 patent itself identifies this as a motivation for the invention. Petitioner contended that replacing Hogan’s fixed spool with the known, functionally equivalent rotating spool from Walters is a predictable design choice to achieve the improved result of efficient cable management. Additional prior art, such as Kline (EX1015) and Kewitsch (EX1016), was cited to demonstrate that using rotatable spools for this purpose was a common and well-understood technique in the field.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a reasonable expectation of success in this combination because Walters already demonstrated a functioning rotating reel system for paying out fiber optic cable. Incorporating this known technique into the standard enclosure taught by Hogan would predictably result in a device that protects the cable from damage during storage and deployment, which was the stated goal of both references.

Ground 2: Obviousness over Hogan, Walters, and Abel - Claims 7, 9-12, 21, and 26-28 are obvious over Hogan, Walters, and Abel.

  • Prior Art Relied Upon: Hogan (Patent 5,109,467), Walters (Patent 6,220,413), and Abel (Patent 5,987,203).
  • Core Argument for this Ground:
    • Prior Art Mapping: This ground built upon the combination in Ground 1 to address dependent claims reciting a "cable manager" for storing slack cable at a location separate from the main spooling portion. Petitioner argued that after the main cable is paid out and individual fibers are fanned out from the protective jacket, as shown in Walters, these exposed fibers are vulnerable to damage from excessive bending. Walters expressly identified this need for care. Petitioner asserted that Abel directly addresses this problem by disclosing a "slack tray" with a dedicated drum (spool) specifically designed to manage and protect these fragile, un-jacketed fibers. Abel’s slack tray includes a curved guide surface and retention fingers to ensure the fibers maintain a safe bend radius.
    • Motivation to Combine: A POSITA, having created the base device from Hogan and Walters, would recognize the problem identified in Walters—the need to protect fanned-out individual fibers. It would be obvious to look for a solution and incorporate a known cable management structure like the slack tray taught by Abel. This combination addresses the specific need to manage slack cable for individual fibers separately from the main jacketed cable spool. Petitioner argued this modification would be a common-sense addition to protect the delicate fibers, using Abel's established design for its intended purpose. The motivation is to improve the organization and protection of the fibers within the enclosure.
    • Expectation of Success: A POSITA would have a high expectation of success because the cable management structures in both Abel (slack tray) and Hogan (upper storage level with retention ears) were designed to organize and protect fibers from excessive bending. Applying this known technique by adding Abel's drum onto the rotating spool of the Hogan/Walters device would be a straightforward application of known components to achieve predictable results—namely, preventing signal attenuation and damage to the fanned-out fibers.

4. Relief Requested

  • Petitioner requests institution of an inter partes review and cancellation of claims 1-7, 9-12, and 21-38 of the ’417 patent as unpatentable.