UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Borealis AG
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`Berry Plastics Corporation
`Patent Owner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Case IPR2016-00235
`Patent 8,883,280
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PETITION FOR INTER PARTES REVIEW OF U.S. PATENT NO. 8,883,280
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`I.
`
`II.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`Page
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT ..................................................................... 1
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED FOR EACH
`CLAIM CHALLENGED ................................................................................ 4
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`Claims for Which Review is Requested ................................................ 4
`
`Statutory Grounds of Challenge ............................................................ 4
`
`III. BACKGROUND ART .................................................................................... 4
`
`A.
`
`Polymeric Materials for Forming Insulative Cellular Structures .......... 4
`
`B. High Melt Strength Polypropylene (HMS-PP) Blends for
`Forming Insulative Cellular Structures ................................................. 5
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`HMS-PP ...................................................................................... 5
`
`Other polymer materials to control properties of foams ............. 6
`
`Additives ..................................................................................... 7
`
`IV. THE ’280 PATENT ......................................................................................... 9
`
`A. Overview of the Disclosure ................................................................... 9
`
`B.
`
`Claim Construction.............................................................................. 10
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`Preamble (Claims 1 and 44-47) ................................................ 11
`
`“impact copolymer”(Claims 44, 46, 47, 51-54, 61, 65,
`66) ............................................................................................. 12
`
`“inert gas” (Claims 46 and 51).................................................. 13
`
`“extrudate” (Claim 52) .............................................................. 14
`
`“article” (Claim 53) ................................................................... 15
`
`ii
`
`

`
`
`
`V.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`CLAIMS 1-14, 36-42, 44-48, 51-54, 61, 62, 65, AND 66 OF THE
`’280 PATENT ARE UNPATENTABLE ...................................................... 15
`
`A. Ground 1: EP ’716 Anticipates Claims 1-2, 4-6, 8-11, 13, 14,
`36, 45, 46, 65, and 66 .......................................................................... 15
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`7.
`
`8.
`
`9.
`
`Claim 1: Independent formulation claim ................................. 16
`
`Claim 2: First material is a homopolymer ............................... 22
`
`Claim 4: First polymer melting temperature ........................... 23
`
`Claim 5: Polyethylene-based second polymer ......................... 23
`
`Claims 6 and 8: Nucleating agent ............................................ 24
`
`Claims 9, 10, and 36: Blowing agent ....................................... 24
`
`Claim 11: Fatty acid-based slip agent ...................................... 25
`
`Claims 13 and 14: Additional components .............................. 25
`
`Claim 45: Independent formulation claim ............................... 26
`
`10. Claim 46: Independent formulation claim ............................... 27
`
`11. Claims 65 and 66: Independent process and structure
`claims ........................................................................................ 28
`
`B. Ground 2: EP ’716 Renders Obvious Claims 5, 37-39, and 46 .......... 30
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`Claim 5: Polyethylene material ................................................ 30
`
`Claims 37-39: Blowing agent ................................................... 31
`
`Claim 46: Independent formulation claim ................................ 34
`
`C. Ground 3: EP ’716 in View of Park Renders Claim 7 Obvious ......... 35
`
`D. Ground 4: EP ’716 in View of Fackler, as Evidenced by PP
`Handbook, Encyclopedia, or Lee, Renders Claims 40 and 41
`Obvious................................................................................................ 37
`
`iii
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`E.
`
`F.
`
`Ground 5: EP ’716 in View of Fackler and Park, as Evidenced
`by PP Handbook, Encyclopedia, or Lee Renders Claim 42
`Obvious................................................................................................ 40
`
`Ground 6: EP ’716 in View of Sheppard, as Evidenced by PP
`Handbook, Renders Claim 12 Obvious ............................................... 43
`
`G. Ground 7: EP ’716 in View of the Admitted Prior Art HMS-PP,
`DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS, Renders Claims 1-6, 8-11, 13-14,
`36-39, 44-46, 51-53, 61, 62, 65, and 66 Obvious ............................... 45
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`6.
`
`Claims 1, 2, 4-6, 8-11, 13, 14, 36-39, 45, 46, 65, and 66 ......... 49
`
`Dependent Claims 3 and 4: Melt strength and melting
`temperature ................................................................................ 49
`
`Independent Claims 44 and 51 .................................................. 50
`
`Independent Claims 52 and 53 .................................................. 51
`
`Independent Claim 61 ............................................................... 52
`
`Dependent Claim 62: A rolled strip .......................................... 53
`
`H. Ground 8: EP ’716 in View of DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS and
`Park Renders Claims 7 and 47 Obvious .............................................. 54
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Dependent Claim 7: Citric acid based nucleating agent ........... 54
`
`Independent Claim 47 ............................................................... 54
`
`Ground 9: EP ’716 in View of DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS, and
`Further in View of Sheppard and PP Handbook, Renders
`Claims 12 and 54 Obvious .................................................................. 55
`
`1.
`
`2.
`
`Dependent Claim 12: Slip agent ............................................... 55
`
`Independent Claim 54 ............................................................... 56
`
`Ground 10: EP ’716 in View of DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS and
`Further in View of Fackler, as Evidenced by PP Handbook,
`Encyclopedia, or Lee, Renders Claims 40 and 41 Obvious ................ 57
`
`I.
`
`J.
`
`iv
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`K. Ground 11: EP ’716 in View of DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS and
`Further in View of Fackler and Park, as Evidenced by PP
`Handbook, Encyclopedia, or Lee, Renders Claim 42 Obvious .......... 58
`
`L.
`
`Ground 12: EP ’716 in View of DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS and
`Park, and Further in View of Reiners and PP Handbook,
`Renders Claim 48 Obvious ................................................................. 58
`
`VI. MANDATORY NOTICES ........................................................................... 59
`
`A.
`
`B.
`
`C.
`
`Real Party-in-Interest: ......................................................................... 59
`
`Related Matters .................................................................................... 59
`
`Lead and Back-Up Counsel, and Service Information ....................... 59
`
`VII. GROUNDS FOR STANDING ...................................................................... 60
`
`VIII. CONCLUSION .............................................................................................. 60
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`Cases
`Amgen Inc. v. F. Hoffman-La Roche Ltd.,
`580 F.3d 1340 (Fed. Cir. 2009) ......................................................................... 32
`
`Page(s)
`
`Catalina Mktg. Int’l, Inc. v. Coolsavings.com, Inc.,
`289 F.3d 801 (Fed. Cir. 2002) ........................................................................... 12
`
`Greenliant Sys., Inc. v. Xicor LLC,
`692 F.3d 1261 (2012) ......................................................................................... 32
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`550 U.S. 398 (2007) .....................................................................................passim
`
`In re Cronyn, 890 F.2d 1158 (Fed. Cir. 1989) ......................................................... 38
`
`In re Gibson, 39 F.2d 975 (C.C.P.A. 1930) ............................................................ 32
`
`In re Hall, 781 F.2d 897 (Fed. Cir. 1986) ............................................................... 38
`
`In re Leshin,
`277 F.2d 197 (CCPA 1960) ........................................................................passim
`
`In re Thorpe, 777 F.2d 695 (Fed. Cir. 1985) .......................................................... 32
`
`Phillips v. AWH Corp.,
`415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc) .................................................... 10-11
`
`Randall Mfg. v. Rea, 733 F.3d 1355 (Fed. Cir. 2013) ............................................ 30
`
`Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473 (Fed. Cir. 1997) ......................................................... 12
`
`Symantec Corp. v. Computer Assocs. Int’l Inc.,
`522 F.3d 1279 (Fed. Cir. 2008) .......................................................................... 12
`
`Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. v. Cadbury Adams USA LLC,
`683 F.3d 1356 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .............................................. 3, 31, 37, 44, 46-47
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`Statutes
`35 U.S.C. § 102 .................................................................................................passim
`
`35 U.S.C. § 103. ......................................................................................................... 4
`
`35 U.S.C. § 311 .......................................................................................................... 4
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319................................................................................................. 1
`
`Other Authorities
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100, et seq. ......................................................................................... 1
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b) .............................................................................................. 11
`
`
`
`
`
`vii
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`LIST OF EXHIBITS
`
`Petition Exhibit 1001: U.S. Patent No. 8,883,280 to Leser et al. (“the ’280
`patent”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1002: Declaration of Dr. Krishnamurthy Jayaraman, Ph.D.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1003: Declaration of Hojung Cho
`
`Petition Exhibit 1004: Affidavit of Christopher Butler of Internet Archive with
`Exhibit A, Borealis Webpage dated January 20, 2010.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1005: Excerpts from Patent Prosecution History of U.S. Patent
`No. 8,883,280, as obtained from USPTO PAIR database.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1006: European Patent No. 1479716 A1 (“EP ’716”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1007: U.S. Patent No. 5,116,881 to Park et al. (“Park”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1008: U.S. Patent No. 6,455,150 to Sheppard et al.
`(“Sheppard’).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1009: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0020162 to
`Fackler et al. (“Fackler”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1010: U.S. Patent No. 7,070,852 to Reiners et al. (“Reiners”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1011: U.S. Patent No. 5,895,614 to Rivera et al. (“Rivera”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1012: Excerpts from Gibson and Ashby, Cellular solids:
`structure and properties, 2nd ed., Cambridge University
`Press (1997) (“Ashby”); lists Library of Congress Card
`Catalog Number: 96-31571 and includes a July 15, 1997
`Library of Congress Copyright Office stamp.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1013: Excerpts from C. Maier and T. Calafut, Polypropylene:
`the Definitive User’s Guide and Databook, Plastics
`Design Library, William Andrew Inc. (1998) (“PP
`Handbook”); lists Library of Congress Card Catalog
`Number: 97-076233 and includes an April 23, 1998
`Library of Congress Copyright Office stamp.
`
`
`Petition Exhibit 1014: Reichelt et al., Cellular Polymers, Vol. 22, No. 5 (2003)
`
`viii
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`315-328 (“Reichelt”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1015: Ratzsch et al., Prog. Polym. Sci., 27 (2002), 1195-1282
`(“Ratzsch”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1016: U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2008/0045638 to
`Chapman et al. (“Chapman”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1017: Excerpts from Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and
`Technology: Plastics, Resins, Rubbers, and Fibers, Vol.
`2, John Wiley & Sons, Inc (1965) (“Encyclopedia”); lists
`Library of Congress Card Catalog Number: 64022188
`and includes a June 14, 1965 Library of Congress
`Copyright Office stamp.
`
`
`Petition Exhibit 1018: U.S. Patent No. 7,883,769 to Seth et al. (“Seth”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1019: U.S. Patent No. 4,604,324 to Nahmias et al. (“Nahmias”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1020: Excerpts from Shau-Tarng Lee, Chul B. Park, and N.S.
`Ramesh, Polymer Foams: Science and Technology, CRC
`Press (2007) (“Lee”); lists Library of Congress Card
`Catalog Number: 2006043863 and includes an October
`24, 2006 Library of Congress Copyright Office stamp.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1021: Grant & Hackh’s Chemical Dictionary, 5th ed., McGraw-
`Hill, Inc. (1987) (“Grant & Hackh’s Dictionary”), page
`303.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1022: Merriam-Webster’s Collegiate Dictionary, 11th ed.
`(2003), pages 70 and 1237 (“Merriam-Webster’s
`Dictionary”).
`
`
`Petition Exhibit 1023: Hawley’s Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 14th Ed.
`(2001) (“Hawley’s Dictionary”), pages 606 and 1066.
`
`Petition Exhibit 1024: U.S. Patent No. 7,825,166 to Sasaki et al. (“Sasaki”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1025: U.S. Patent No. 5,925,450 to Karabedian et al.
`(“Karabedian”).
`
`Petition Exhibit 1026: A copy of USPTO assignment record of the ’280 patent.
`
`ix
`
`

`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`a copy of webpage,
`http://www.polymerjournals.com/journals.asp?Page=111
`&JournalType=cp&JournalIssue=cp22-5&JIP=, listing
`Ex. 1014.
`
`a copy of webpage,
`http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S00796
`70002000060, listing Ex. 1015.
`
`a copy of Library of Congress Online Catalog Record of
`Exhibit 1012 under LC Control No. 96-31751 from
`http://lccn.loc.gov/96031571.
`
`a copy of Library of Congress Online Catalog Record of
`Exhibit 1013 under LC Control No. 97-076233 from
`http://lccn.loc.gov/97076233.
`
`a copy of Library of Congress Online Catalog Record of
`Exhibit 1017 under LC Control No. 64022188 from
`http://lccn.loc.gov/64022188.
`
`a copy of Library of Congress Online Catalog Record of
`Exhibit 1020 under LC Control No. 2006043863 from
`http://lccn.loc.gov/2006043863.
`
`a copy of a brochure “Borealis Dapoly™ HMS
`Polypropylene for Foam Extrusion” obtained from
`Borealis webpage obtained from the Internet Archive’s
`“Wayback Machine” as of November 16, 2008
`(https://web.archive.org/web/20081116085125/http://ww
`w.borealisgroup.com/pdf/literature/borealis-
`borouge/brochure/K_IN0020_GB_FF_2007_10_BB.pdf)
`(“Brochure ’08”).
`
`
`
`Petition Exhibit 1027:
`
`Petition Exhibit 1028:
`
`Petition Exhibit 1029:
`
`Petition Exhibit 1030:
`
`Petition Exhibit 1031:
`
`Petition Exhibit 1032:
`
`Petition Exhibit 1033:
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`x
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`Petitioner Borealis AG requests inter partes review of claims 1-14, 36-42,
`
`44-48, 51-54, 61, 62, 65, and 66 of U.S. Patent No. 8,883, 280 (“the ’280 patent”)
`
`(Ex. 1001), purportedly assigned to Berry Plastics Corporation1 (“Patent Owner”
`
`or “Berry”), in accordance with 35 U.S.C. §§ 311-319 and 37 C.F.R. § 42.100 et
`
`seq.
`
`I.
`
`PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
`
`The challenged claims concern formulations of known high melt strength
`
`polypropylene (“HMS-PP”) suitable for forming an insulative cellular
`
`non-aromatic polymeric structure. Ex. 1001, e.g., claim 1. Insulative cellular
`
`polymeric structures of this type are referred to as “polymeric foams,” and as
`
`commonly used in, for example, foam drink cups. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 29-30; see also
`
`Ex. 1020, Lee, 122; Ex. 1012, Ashby, 4, 5.
`
`In particular, the claimed formulations contain at least one HMS-PP having
`
`long chain branching, at least one polymer selected from the group consisting of
`
`polypropylene, polyethylene, and mixtures thereof, at least one nucleating agent,
`
`and at least one slip agent. Ex. 1001, e.g., claim 1. But such formulations of
`
`
`1 USPTO records indicate that all ten inventors assigned their entire rights to
`
`Berry, as recorded on August 2, 2012. Ex. 1026. On December 23, 2014, IP
`
`Security Agreements were recorded also. Ex. 1026.
`
`1
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`HMS-PP were well known and obvious. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 61-76; Ex. 1006, ¶¶ [0032]-
`
`[0036].
`
`Example 4 of EP 1479716 (“EP ’716”) (Ex. 1006) specifically discloses an
`
`anticipatory polymer blend for foam products that comprises HMS-PP (Profax™
`
`814), polypropylene-based polymer (HIFAX™ CA 60A), nucleating agent (talc),
`
`slip agent (stearamide/palmitamide blend), and blowing agent (isobutane).
`
`Ex. 1006, ¶¶ [0035]-[0036].
`
`Although EP ’716 was cited in an Information Disclosure Statement (IDS)
`
`of May 3, 2013 (See Ex. 1005, pages 6, 10), it was not otherwise addressed on the
`
`record during the prosecution of the ’280 patent. It appears that the Examiner did
`
`not fully consider EP ’716, given that he allowed the claims, inaccurately believing
`
`that the prior does not teach or suggest a formulation containing all of the recited
`
`elements.2
`
`
`2 During the prosecution, the Notice of Allowance included the following
`
`Examiner’s Statement of Reasons for Allowance:
`
`[Regarding the independent claims] the prior art does not teach or
`suggest a formulation, or method for forming said formulation, for
`forming an insulative cellular non-aromatic polymeric structure, the
`formulation comprising a polymer material comprising at least one
`high melt strength polypropylene, at least one nucleating agent
`
`
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`Some of the ’280 patent claims further require at least one HMS-PP “having
`
`a melt strength of at least 36 and a melting temperature of at least 163° C.
`
`(325.4° F.).” Ex. 1001, e.g., claims 44, 47, and 51-54. Such HMS-PP also was
`
`well known. Indeed, by the Patent Owner’s admission in the ’280 patent,
`
`Petitioner’s own prior art DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS-PP homopolymer product
`
`(Borealis) (“DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS”) has the required melt strength and
`
`melting temperature. Ex. 1001, 4:20-25. It was also specifically known for use in
`
`foams. Ex. 1004, page 6.
`
`As discussed in more detail below, EP ’716 expressly discloses formulations
`
`that anticipate most of the challenged claims. The additional or specific
`
`components in the remainder of the challenged claims were all conventional for
`
`foams and would have been obvious. Wm. Wrigley Jr. Co. v. Cadbury Adams USA
`
`LLC, 683 F.3d 1356, 1364-65 (Fed. Cir. 2012). The disclosures of EP ’716 alone
`
`and in combination with the prior art, such as DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS, thus,
`
`warrant the cancellation of claims 1-14, 36-42, 44-48, 51-54, 61, 62, 65, and 66.
`
`
`
`
`selected from the group consisting of chemical nucleating agents,
`physical nucleating agents, and combinations thereof, and at least one
`slip agent.
`Ex. 1005, page 29 (Notice of Allowance dated October 6, 2014, page 2).
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`II.
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`
`
`STATEMENT OF PRECISE RELIEF REQUESTED FOR EACH
`CLAIM CHALLENGED
`A. Claims for Which Review is Requested
`Petitioner requests review under 35 U.S.C. § 311 of claims 1-14, 36-42, 44-
`
`48, 51-54, 61, 62, 65, and 66 of the ’280 patent, and the cancellation of these
`
`claims as unpatentable.
`
`Statutory Grounds of Challenge
`
`B.
`Claims 1-14, 36-42, 44-48, 51-54, 61, 62, 65, and 66 are unpatentable under
`
`35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and/or 103. The claim construction, reasons for unpatentability,
`
`and specific evidence supporting this request are detailed below.
`
`III. BACKGROUND ART
`Polymeric Materials for Forming Insulative Cellular Structures
`A.
`For several decades, polymer materials have been developed and used to
`
`make polymeric foams. Ex. 1020, Lee, 5-7. Polystyrene foams are among the
`
`earliest, though many others, including HMS-PP, have been developed and used
`
`since the 1930s. Ex. 1020, Lee, 7 (Table 1.6). Typical applications of polymeric
`
`foams include drink cups, food containers or trays, packaging, insulation,
`
`automotive, sports, and medical applications. Ex. 1002, ¶ 29; Ex. 1013, PP
`
`Handbook, 71-72; Ex. 1020, Lee, 21, 89, 121-130.
`
`Polymeric foams contain two principle phases: (1) a polymer matrix that
`
`4
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`provides structure and support and (2) gaseous voids or bubbles (also referred to as
`
`“cells”) that provide thermal insulation. Ex. 1002, ¶ 30; Ex. 1020, Lee, 3;
`
`Ex. 1012, Ashby, 4, 283. Polymeric foams can be produced by introducing gas
`
`bubbles into a liquid polymer-based formulation, allowing the bubbles to grow and
`
`stabilize, and then solidifying the polymer to trap the bubbles. Ex. 1002, ¶ 32; Ex.
`
`1012, Ashby, 4, 283; Ex. 1020, Lee, page 1-3. The cellular structure provides the
`
`useful low thermal conductivity and thermal insulation. Ex. 1002, ¶ 31; Ex. 1012,
`
`Ashby, 283; Ex. 1013, PP Handbook, 46; Ex. 1020, Lee, 8, 122-123.
`
`The ’280 patent seeks to claim such known and obvious polymer-based
`
`formulations, made from existing polymers and other components, suitable for
`
`forming a foam, what the ’280 patent calls “an insulative non-aromatic polymeric
`
`cellular structure.” Ex. 1001, e.g., 24:2-3 (claim 1); Ex. 1002, ¶ 34.
`
`B. High Melt Strength Polypropylene (HMS-PP) Blends for Forming
`Insulative Cellular Structures
`1. HMS-PP
`Due to its linear polymeric structure, conventional polypropylene (“PP”) has
`
`undesirably low melt strength and produces foams with poor cell integrity.
`
`Ex. 1002, ¶ 35; Ex. 1006, EP ’716, ¶ [0005]; Ex. 1014, Reichelt, 315-316
`
`(published in 2003; see Ex. 1003; Ex. 1027); Ex. 1020, Lee, 127. In contrast,
`
`HMS-PP is a long-chain branched polypropylene. Ex. 1006, EP ’716, ¶ [0006];
`
`Ex. 1014, Reichelt, 316. This means that the polymer chains have long arms
`
`5
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`coming off the backbone, branched into various directions. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 36-37;
`
`see also Ex. 1014, Reichelt, 316; Ex. 1015, Ratzsch, 1254-1255 (published in
`
`2002; see Ex. 1003; Ex. 1028). These branches increase the number of inter-
`
`polymer entanglements, and provide significantly higher melt strength over linear
`
`PP. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 36-38; Ex. 1014, Reichelt, 316; Ex. 1006, EP ’716, ¶ [0006]; Ex.
`
`1015, Ratzsch, 1257-1258, 1263. Melt strength refers to the resistance of a
`
`polymer melt to extension, and is an important parameter for foaming. Ex. 1002,
`
`¶¶ 36-39; see also Ex. 1013, PP Handbook, 69; Ex. 1015, Ratzsch, 1261-62, 1265-
`
`1266. Blends with HMS-PP also lead to a better balance of the rates of
`
`crystallization and bubble growth, enabling more uniform and controlled cellular
`
`structures and low-density foams. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 36-41.
`
`Representative HMS-PPs, at the time that the application leading to the ’280
`
`patent was filed, include Borealis DAPLOY™ HMS-PP products including
`
`WB130 HMS and WB140 HMS, and Basell Profax™ PF-814. Ex. 1002, ¶ 42;
`
`Ex. 1006, ¶ [0007]; Ex. 1004, pages 5-6; Ex. 1018, Seth, 16:33-34. The ’280
`
`patent itself acknowledges that Borealis DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS is a known
`
`prior art HMS-PP suitable for foam applications. See Ex. 1001, 4:20-23; Ex. 1002,
`
`¶ 43.
`
`2. Other polymer materials to control properties of foams
`It was common to modify the performance of the base polymer in foam
`
`6
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`extrusions by adding another polymer or additives. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 44-60. The
`
`desired processing properties could be achieved by blending HMS-PP with
`
`polymeric materials such as PP homopolymer and copolymers and/or various
`
`forms of polyethylene. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 45-50; Ex. 1006, EP ’716, ¶¶ [0013]-[0021];
`
`Ex. 1014, Reichelt, 316.
`
`EP ’716, for example, teaches blends of HMS-PP with polypropylene
`
`copolymers to obtain high flexibility and high temperature resistance. Ex. 1006,
`
`EP ’716, ¶¶ [0013]-[0015]. Representative examples of additional polymeric
`
`materials include what are known as “impact copolymers” that increase impact
`
`strength of a polymeric foam. Ex. 1002, ¶ 49. For example, TPO PP (thermoplastic
`
`olefin-PP), produced by blending ethylene-propylene rubber with PP, is an impact
`
`copolymer used for such blending. Id.; Ex. 1006, EP ’716, ¶¶ [0014], [0028].
`
`Additives
`
`3.
`Formulations of HMS-PP may contain various additives for foaming process
`
`to further tailor the processability and mechanical properties of the resulting foam
`
`structures. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 51-60; Ex. 1007, Park, 10:11-16; Ex. 1012, Ashby, 4; Ex.
`
`1013, PP handbook, 34-35, 45-47; Ex. 1020, Lee, 41-42.
`
`a.
`Nucleating agents provide sites for bubble formation and crystal nucleation,
`
`Nucleating agent
`
`influencing processing characteristics and cellular and mechanical properties of the
`
`7
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`final foam structures, such as cell size and density. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 52-53; Ex. 1007,
`
`Park, 10:11-16; Ex. 1013, PP handbook, 34-35. Representative nucleating agents
`
`include talc and other inert solids. Ex. 1002, ¶ 54; Ex. 1007, Park, 10: 11-16.
`
`Other nucleating agents for bubble formation include mixtures of citric acid and
`
`sodium bicarbonate, such as Hydrocerol™ CF-40 (Clariant Corporation). Ex.
`
`1002, ¶ 267; Ex. 1007, Park, 10:11-16; Ex. 1011, Rivera, 3:65-67, 4:1-4.
`
`b.
`Blowing agents introduce gas to form bubbles that provide the foam’s
`
`Blowing agent
`
`cellular structure. Ex. 1013, PP Handbook, 45. Blowing agents are classified as
`
`physical or chemical depending on how gas is evolved. Ex. 1002, ¶ 55; Ex. 1013,
`
`PP Handbook, 46; Ex. 1017, Encyclopedia, 532.
`
`Physical blowing agents are typically gasses mixed with the polymer at high
`
`pressure such that they can expand into bubbles. Ex. 1002, ¶ 56; Ex. 1012, Ashby,
`
`4; Ex. 1020, Lee, 19, 42, 43. Examples include carbon dioxide, nitrogen, helium,
`
`argon, air, pentane, butane or other alkane. Ex. 1002, ¶ 56; Ex. 1012, Ashby, 4;
`
`Ex. 1006, EP ’716, ¶ [0022]; Ex. 1013, PP Handbook, 45-47; Ex. 1020, Lee, 41-
`
`42; Ex. 1017, Encyclopedia, 533-534.
`
`Chemical blowing agents either decompose on heating or react with other
`
`components to release gas in situ. Ex. 1002, ¶ 57; Ex. 1012, Ashby, 5; Ex. 1013,
`
`PP Handbook, 45-47; Ex. 1020, Lee, 43-44; Ex. 1017, Encyclopedia, 535-536. For
`
`8
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`example, during the foaming process, sodium bicarbonate and calcium carbonate
`
`can release CO2; and azo-compounds can release N2. Ex. 1002, ¶ 57; Ex. 1017,
`
`Encyclopedia, 538-560.
`
`c.
`Slip agents provide surface lubrication during and immediately after foam
`
`Slip agent
`
`processing. Ex. 1013, PP Handbook, 45, 397. They exude to the surface of the
`
`polymer article and provide a coating that reduces the coefficient of friction. Ex.
`
`1013, PP Handbook, 45. Common slip agents include fatty acid esters or fatty acid
`
`amides, such as stearamide, erucamide and oleamide. Ex. 1002, ¶¶ 58-59;
`
`Ex. 1013, PP Handbook, 45, 397; Ex. 1019, Nahmias, 2:20-27, 4:29-52.
`
`IV. THE ’280 PATENT
`A. Overview of the Disclosure
`The ’280 patent purports to disclose polymer-based formulations that can be
`
`formed to produce an insulative non-aromatic polymeric material. Ex. 1001, 1:15-
`
`18. More specifically, the formulations comprise HMS-PP and a polypropylene
`
`copolymer or homopolymer (or both). Ex. 1001, 1:33-36. The insulative cellular
`
`non-aromatic polymeric material also includes cell-forming agents including at
`
`least one nucleating agent and a blowing agent. Ex. 1001, 1:36-38. In some
`
`embodiments, the insulative cellular non-aromatic polymeric material further
`
`comprises a slip agent. Ex. 1001, 1:38-40.
`
`As an example of a suitable HMS-PP base resin, the ’280 patent
`
`9
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`specification discloses DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS (Borealis). Ex. 1001, 4:20-26.
`
`DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS is a high melt strength structural isomeric modified
`
`polypropylene homopolymer (melt strength=36, as tested per ISO 16790, melting
`
`temperature=325.4° F. (163° C.) using ISO 11357). Id.
`
`In Example 1, DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS was used as the base resin in
`
`combination with a secondary resin (polypropylene homopolymer), and blended
`
`with additives such as a nucleating agent, a slip agent, and a blowing agent.
`
`Ex. 1001, 13:60-14:15. Example 2 also uses DAPLOY™ WB140 HMS
`
`homopolymer with other components similar to Example 1’s formulation.
`
`Ex. 1001, 19:35-44.
`
`As detailed below, however, the claimed HMS-PP-based formulations for
`
`forming an insulative cellular non-aromatic polymeric material were already well
`
`known in, or obvious from, the art prior to the time the application leading to the
`
`’280 patent.
`
`B. Claim Construction
`Claim terms are given their ordinary and accustomed meaning as understood
`
`by one of ordinary skill in the art.3 Phillips v. AWH Corp., 415 F.3d 1303, 1312-
`
`
`3 A person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the invention would have
`
`had a bachelor’s degree in a field such as chemistry, chemical engineering, or
`
`
`
`10
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`13 (Fed. Cir. 2005) (en banc). A claim in an unexpired patent subject to inter
`
`partes review receives the “broadest reasonable construction in light of the
`
`specification of the patent in which it appears.” 37 C.F.R. § 42.100(b). And the
`
`constructions in this proceeding may differ from the constructions in any district
`
`court or ITC litigation.
`
`As discussed below, Petitioner proposed construction of five terms under the
`
`broadest reasonable interpretation (BRI). However, none of the grounds in this
`
`Petition depend on the specific construction since the claims are anticipated or
`
`obvious regardless.4
`
`Preamble (Claims 1 and 44-47)
`
`1.
`Claims 1 and 44-47 recite, among other things: “[a] formulation for forming
`
`an insulative cellular non-aromatic polymeric structure.” Ex. 1001, 24:2-3, 26:51-
`
`52, 66-67, 27:7-8, 19-20. Under the BRI, this recitation, appearing in the claims’
`
`preambles, provides no patentable significance to the claimed subject matter.
`
`
`materials science, and at least two years of experience studying, analyzing, or
`
`preparing formulations of polymeric blends and foam/cellular structures made
`
`therefrom. Ex. 1002, ¶ 26.
`
`4 While Petitioner is unable to raise Section 112 grounds in an inter partes
`
`review, Petitioner notes that it reserves the right to do so in an appropriate forum.
`
`11
`
`

`
`
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`United States Patent No. 8,883,280
`
`As explained by the Federal Circuit, a preamble is not limiting “‘where a
`
`patentee defines a structurally complete invention in the claim body and uses the
`
`preamble only to state a purpose or intended use for the invention.’” Catalina
`
`Mktg. Int’l, Inc. v. Coolsavings.com, Inc., 289 F.3d 801, 808 (Fed. Cir. 2002)
`
`(quoting Rowe v. Dror, 112 F.3d 473, 478 (Fed. Cir. 1997)); see also Symantec
`
`Corp. v. Computer Assocs. Int’l Inc., 522 F.3d 1279, 1288 (Fed. Cir. 2008).
`
`Here, the recitations “for forming an insulative cellular non-aromatic
`
`polymeric structure” in the preambles of independent claims 1 and 44-47 are mere
`
`statements of intended use for a formulation that is alr