`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
`
`___________________
`
`
`BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
`
`___________________
`
`
`
`POLYGROUP LIMITED (MCO),
`Petitioner
`
`v.
`
`WILLIS ELECTRIC COMPANY, LIMITED,
`Patent Owner
`
`___________________
`
`Case IPR2016-016131
`Patent 9,044,056 B2
`___________________
`
`PETITIONER’S OPPOSITION TO
`PATENT OWNER’S MOTION TO AMEND
`
`
`
`Mail Stop “PATENT BOARD”
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`U.S. Patent & Trademark Office
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`1 Proceeding IPR2016-00802 has been consolidated with this proceeding.
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`TABLE OOF CONTTENTS
`
`
`
`..... 1 
`..... 2 
`
`- i -
`
`
`
`
`
`INTRODDUCTION ..................................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PO’S MOOTION FAAILS TO CCOMPLY WWITH BAASIC PTABB RULES .
`
`A.
`
`  PO’s Motion faails to fulfi
`
`
`
`ll its duty oof candor aand good ffaith,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`by omittiing materiaal prior art of record oof which PPO had nottice ...........
`..... 3 
`
` material pprior
`
`
`
`1.  TThe proseccution histoory of the
`
`’056 Patennt contains
`..... 4 
`
`aart referen
`
`ces not disscussed or
`
`
`even menttioned by PPO ............
`involving
`Patent
`
`
`2.  RRelated prroceedings
`
`children oof the ’056
`
`
`
`ccontains mmaterial prior art referrences commpletely ig
`
`nored by PPO . 5 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3.  PPO fails too disclose iits own pattents descrribing key ffeatures off the
`..... 6 
`
`
`
`’056 Patennt ................................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`4.  PPO knew oof other priior art at thhe time of
`
`
`the ’056 PPatent, whicch
`..... 7 
`
`PPO now tr
`
`
`ies to claimm ...............................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`  PO’s Motion faails to respoond to grouunds of unnpatentabillity ............
`B.
`..... 8 
`C.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`  PO’s Motion arrgues distinnctions oveer the priorr art whichh are not
`..... 8 
`
`
`
`supportedd by the litteral language of the
`claims .....
`
`..................................
`
`D.
`
`
`
`  PO’s Motion faails to provvide construuction for
`
`new subjeect matter i
`n
`
`..................................
`... 11 
`
`
`
`
`the propoosed Substiitute Claimms ..............................
`1. 
`
`
`
`
`““commonlly transmittted” (in Teerm 24.6) .
`
`..................................
`... 11 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PO’S PRROPOSED SUBSTITTUTE CLAAIMS FAILL, BECAUUSE THEYY
`
`
`
`
`
`
`ARE UNNPATENTAABLE UNNDER 35 UU.S.C. §1122 ................................
`... 12 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`  The tterms of thhe proposedd Substitutte Claims aare indefinnite ............
`A.
`... 13 
`1. 
`“a last wir
`
`
`
`
`e electricallly conneccted to a lasst light elemment
`
`
`
`
`
`
`assembly oof the pluraality of ligght elementt assembliees at a firstt end
`
`
`
`
`
`
`and electriically connnected to thhe second wwire of thee first wirinng
`... 13 
`
`
`
`harness at a second eend” (Termm [23.13]) .
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`“first and ssecond electrical connnectors of f the secondd electricall
`... 15 
`
`
`
`connector”” (Term 244.4) ............................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`PO’S MOOTION FAAILS TO SSHOW PATTENTABIILITY UNNDER
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`35 U.S.CC. §103 OFF THE PROOPOSED SSUBSTITUUTE CLAIIMS OVERR
`... 16 
`
`
`
`
`THE KNNOWN MAATERIAL PPRIOR ARRT ............
`
`..................................
`
`“aah
`
`“c
`
`2. 
`
`
`
`
`
`I. 
`II. 
`
`III. 
`
`IV. 
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`  Propoosed Substtitute Claimm 21 is unppatentable
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`A.
`
`
`B.
`
`
`
`
`ordover priorr art of reco
`
`
`
` - ii -
`
`
`
`OD a b c d
`
`c. 
`
`d. 
`
`
`
`ee. 
`
`f g
`
`f. 
`
`g. 
`
`
`17 
`... 17 
`
`
`
`
`1.  MMotivationn to Combiine .............................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.  PPO’s Motiion fails to show pateentability oover Millerr in view oof
`
`
`Otto and Juumo, and ffurther in vview of MccLeish or FFallosi or
`
`
`
`... 23 
`
`
`
`Daniels ......................................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`[21.P]] A lightedd artificial ttree, compprising: .......................
`a. 
`
`
`... 23 
`b. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[21.1]] A power cord confiigured to reeceive elecctrical powwer
`
`
`
`
`from an externaal power soource and tto transmit
`
`power to tthe
`
`
`
`lighteed artificiall tree, .........................
`
`..................................
`... 23 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[21.2--4] [These claim termms are subsstantially iddentical too
`
`
`
`
`
`those under reviiew from thhe originall Petition] ..................
`... 23 
`
`the electriical
`
`
`
`
`[21.5]] and incluuding an eleectrical terrminal set,
`
`
`
`
`
`
`terminnal set inclluding a firrst electriccal terminal positioneed in
`
`
`
`
`
`
`line wwith the cenntral verticcal axis, [[aand ]]a seccond electriical
`... 24 
`
`
`
`
`
`terminnal, and a tthird electrrical terminnal; ............................
`of the
`
`
`
`[21.6]] Wherein two of thee electrical
`terminals
`
`
`
`
`
`
`electrrical terminnal set are iin electricaal connectiion with thhe
`first
`
`
`
`
`
`first liight string and configgured to traansmit powwer to the f
`
`
`
`light sstring, andd another ellectrical te
`
`
`rminal of tthe electriccal
`
`
`
`
`
`terminnal set, othher than thee two electtrical termiinals in
`
` is in electtrical
`
`
`electrrical connection with
`
`the first liight string,
`... 28 
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`conneection withh the powerr cord; ......
`
`identical tto
`
`
`
`
`[21.7--13] [These claim terrms are subbstantially
`
`
`
`
`
`those under reviiew from thhe originall Petition] ..................
`... 29 
`
`
`
`
`
`[21.144] such thaat the first eelectrical tterminal off the first
`
`
`
`
`
`electrrical connector is elecctrically coonnected too the first
`
`
`
`
`
`
`electrrical terminnal of the ssecond elecctrical connnector, andd the
`
`
`seconnd electricaal terminal
`
`
`
`of the firstt electricall connectorr is
`
`
`
`electrrically connnected to thhe second
`
`
`electrical tterminal off the
`
`
`
`seconnd electricaal connectoor, and the
`
`
`third electtrical termiinal
`
`
`
`
`
`
`of thee first electtrical conneector is eleectrically cconnected tto
`
`
`
`
`
`the thhird electriccal terminaal of the seecond electtrical
`... 29 
`
`
`
`conneector. ..........................................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`  Propoosed Substtitute Claimm 22 is unppatentable
`
`
`over priorr art of recoord
`31 
`
`

`

`
`
`
`n to Combiine .............................
`
`..................................
`1.  MMotivation
`... 31 
`
`in view off
`
`
`
`
`
`2.  PPO’s Motiion fails to show pateentability oover Hicks
`... 36 
`
`
`
`
`
`Otto, and ffurther in vview of MccLeish or FFallosi or DDaniels .....
`
`
`
`
`
`[22.P]] A lightedd artificial ttree, compprising: .......................
`a. 
`... 36 
`b. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[22.1]] A power cord confiigured to reeceive elecctrical powwer
`
`
`
`
`from an externaal power soource and tto transmit
`
`power to tthe
`
`
`
`lighteed artificiall tree, .........................
`
`..................................
`... 36 
`
`
`
`[22.2--4,6] [Thesse claim teerms are id
`
`
`entical to tthose undeer
`... 37 
`
`
`
`revieww from thee original PPetition] ....
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`[22.5]] Wherein the first ellectrical terrminal of tthe second
`
`erminal off the
`
`
`
`
`electrrical connector and thhe second eelectrical t
`
`
`
`
`
`
`seconnd electricaal connectoor are in eleectrical connnection wwith
`
`
`
`
`
`
`the ligght string aand configuured to traansmit powwer to the liight
`
`
`
`
`stringg, and the thhird electriical terminnal of the s
`econd
`
`electricallly connect
`
`
`
`electrrical connector is connfigured to
`of
`
`
`
`
`
`with tthe power ccord throuugh the thirrd electricaal terminal
`... 37 
`
`
`the firrst electrical connect
`or; ...........
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`  Propoosed Substtitute Claimm 23 is unppatentable
`
`
`over priorr art of recoord
`38 
`... 38 
`
`
`
`
`1.  MMotivationn to Combiine .............................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.  PPO’s Motiion fails to show pateentability oover Millerr in view oof
`
`
`
`Seghers, annd further in view off McLeish
`or Falossi
`
`or Danielss .. 43 
`
`
`
`[23.P]] A lightedd artificial ttree, compprising: .......................
`
`
`a. 
`... 43 
`b. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.1]] A power cord confiigured to reeceive elecctrical powwer
`
`
`
`
`to transmit ource and tal power sofrom an externa
`
`power to tthe
`
`
`
`
`
`
`lighteed artificiall tree, the ppower cordd includingg a first powwer
`... 43 
`
`
`
`wire aand a seconnd power wwire .........
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.2--6] [These claim termms are idenntical to thoose under
`
`
`
`revieww from thee original PPetition] ....
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.7]] Includingg a first eleectrical termminal set, tthe first
`
`
`
`
`
`
`electrrical terminnal set incluuding a firrst electricaal terminall,
`
`
`
`[[and ]]a secondd electricall terminal,
`
`
`and a thirdd electricall
`
`
`
`
`
`terminnal, wherein two of tthe electriccal terminaals of the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`electrrical terminnal set are iin electricaal connectiion with thhe
`first
`
`
`
`
`
`first liight string and configgured to traansmit powwer to the f
`
`
`
`light sstring, andd another ellectrical te
`
`
`rminal of tthe electriccal
`
`O a b c d
`
`c. 
`
`d. 
`
`... 43 
`
` - iii -
`
`
`
`a b
`
`c d
`
`c. 
`
`d. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.
`
`
`

`

`
`
`ee. 
`
`
`
`ff. 
`
`D.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`terminnal set, othher than thee two electtrical termiinals in
`
` in electriccal
`
`
`electrrical connection with
`
`the first liight string,
`
`
`
`
`conneection withh one of thee first powwer wire or
`
`the secondd
`
`..................................
`... 44 
`
`
`
`powerr wire of thhe power ccord; and ..
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.8]] A first wiiring harneess positionned at leasst in part
`
`
`
`
`
`withinn the first ttrunk bodyy and compprising a firrst wire, a
`
`
`
`
`
`seconnd wire, andd a third wwire, the firrst wire eleectrically
`
`
`
`
`
`
`conneected to thee first electtrical termiinal and thhe second wwire
`
`
`
`electrrically connnected to thhe second
`
`
`electrical tterminal, thhe
`
`
`
`
`third wwire electrrically connnected to tthe third te
`
`rminal andd
`
`
`conneected to thee one of th
`
`
`
`e first powwer wire orr the secondd
`
`
`
`powerr wire of thhe power ccord; .........
`
`..................................
`... 45 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`[23.9--13] [These claim terrms are ideentical to thhose underr
`
`
`
`revieww from thee original PPetition] ....
`
`..................................
`... 46 
`
`
`
`
`  Propoosed Substtitute Claimm 24 is unppatentable
`
`
`over priorr art of recoord
`46 
`... 46 
`
`
`
`
`1.  MMotivationn to Combiine .............................
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`2.  PPO’s Motiion fails to show pateentability oover Millerr in view oof
`................
`... 49 
`Loomis ....
`
`..................................
`
`..................................
`
`[24.P--5] [These
`
`
`
`claim termms are idenntical to thoose under
`a. 
`
`
`
`revieww from thee original PPetition] ....
`
`..................................
`... 49 
`ight string
`
`
`
`
`[24.6]] Wherein power trannsmitted too the first l
`and
`
`transmitteed through
`the
`
`
`
`the seecond lightt string is ccommonly
`
`
`
`
`
`electrrical hub off the seconnd tree porttion, such tthat the
`
`
`
`
`electrrical hub prrovides powwer to bothh the first
`
`light stringg
`
`..................................
`... 49 
`
`
`
`and thhe second llight stringg; ..............
`
`
`
`identical tto those unnder revieww
`
`
`[24.7]] [This claiim term is
`
`
`
`from tthe originaal Petition]] ...............
`... 50 
`
`..................................
`
`
`
`
`CONCLUUSION .......................................................
`
`..................................
`... 50 
`
`L a b
`
`b. 
`
`
`
`cc. 
`
`
`
`
`
` - iv -
`
`
`
`
`
`
`V. 
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`UPDATED TABLE OF PETITIONER’S EXHIBITS2
`
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`May 8, 2012
`(filing date)
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`1001
`
`USPN 9,044,056 to Chen (the ’056 Patent)
`(Patent under Inter Partes Review)
`
`1002
`
`File History for USPN 9,044,056
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`Patent Owner’s Preliminary Response
`from IPR2014-01263
`
`Decision on Institution from
`IPR2014-01263
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`
`2 For the Board’s convenience, this Updated Table of Petitioner’s Exhibits
`
`includes all references cited in this Reply and in the related Opposition to Motion
`
`to Amend. Accordingly, the Table of Exhibits in the Reply and Opposition are
`
`identical.
`
`3 For ease of review, Petitioner adopts the following citation convention for
`
`this Reply and the accompanying Opposition to Motion to Amend (and their relat-
`
`ed Declarations). U.S. patent references, English-language foreign references, and
`
`the concurrently filed Declaration are cited by the reference’s internal column:line,
`
`page:line, or ¶number (not stamped pagination). Foreign-language patent refer-
`
`ences/translations and supporting papers (file history, Prior IPR papers, definitions,
`
`C.V.) are cited by stamped pagination number.
`
`
`
`
` - v -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`Declaration of Mike Wood in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`the ’056 Patent
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`
`
`
`USPN 4,020,201 to Miller (Miller)
`
`Apr. 26, 1977
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`US 2007/0230174 to Hicks et al. (Hicks) Oct. 4, 2007
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`DE 84 36 328.2 to Otto (Otto)
`(with German version; English translation;
`and Translation Certification of Wheatleigh
`Dunham per 37 C.F.R. § 42.63(b))
`
`FR 1,215,214 to Jumo (Jumo)
`(with French version; English translation;
`and Translation Certification of Donald
`W. Hanley per 37 C.F.R. § 42.63(b))
`
`Apr. 4, 1985
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Apr. 15, 1960
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 7,066,739 to McLeish (McLeish)
`
`June 27, 2006
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 1,974,472 to Seghers (Seghers)
`
`Sept. 25, 1934
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 6,752,512 to Pan (Pan)
`
`June 22, 2004
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 7,132,139 to Yang (Yang)
`
`Nov. 7, 2006
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 2,563,713 to Frei et al. (Frei)
`
`Aug. 7, 1951
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 735,010 to Zahl (Zahl)
`
`July 28, 1903
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 1,495,695 to Karr (Karr)
`
`May 27, 1924
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 1,656,148 to Harris (Harris)
`
`Jan. 10, 1928
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 2,188,529 to Corina (Corina)
`
`Jan. 30, 1940
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 2,857,506 to Minteer (Minteer)
`
`Oct. 21, 1958
`
`§ 102(b)
`
` - vi -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`Apr. 28, 1964
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`USPN 3,131,112 to Abramson (Abram-
`son)
`
`USPN 3,970,834 to Smith (Smith)
`
`July 20, 1976
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 3,985,924 to Pritza (Pritza)
`
`Oct. 12, 1976
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 4,072,857 to DeVicaris (DeVicaris) Feb. 7, 1978
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`US 2007/0253191 to Chin et al. (Chin)
`
`Nov. 1, 2007
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1025 WO 96/26661 to Lala (Lala)
`
`Sept. 6, 1996
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1026
`
`USPN 5,776,559 to Woolford (Woolford)
`
`July 7, 1998
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1027
`
`USPN 8,053,042 to Loomis (Loomis)
`
`July 14, 2009
`(earliest
`claimed priori-
`ty date)
`
`§ 102(e)
`
`1028
`
`USPN 3,521,216 to Tolegian (Tolegian)
`
`July 21, 1970
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1029
`
`US 2010/0099287 to Colburn et al. (Col-
`burn)
`
`1030
`
`US 2010/0159713 to Nishihira et al.
`(Nishihira)
`
`USPN 3,107,966 to Bonhomme
`(Bonhomme 966)
`
`USPN 3,470,527 to Bonhomme
`(Bonhomme 527)
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`
`
`
`Oct. 2, 2008
`(earliest
`claimed priori-
`ty date)
`
`Dec. 19, 2008
`(earliest
`claimed priori-
`ty date)
`
`§ 102(a) §
`102(e)
`
`§ 102(a)
`§ 102(e)
`
`Oct. 22, 1963
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Sept. 30, 1969
`
`§ 102(b)
`
` - vii -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`June 15, 1971
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 3,585,564 to Skjervoll (Skjervoll)
`
`USPN 5,091,834 to Kao et al. (Kao834)
`
`Feb. 25, 1992
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 5,409,403 to Falossi et al. (Falossi) Apr. 25, 1995
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`EP 1,049,206 to Nania et al. (Nania)
`
`Nov. 2, 2000
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 7,207,844 to Peng (Peng)
`
`Apr. 24, 2007
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 438,310 to Edison (Edison)
`
`Oct. 14, 1890
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`USPN 7,311,566 to Dent (Dent)
`
`Dec. 25, 2007
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`GB 2 169 198 to Fung (Fung)
`
`July 9, 1986
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
`1043
`
`1044
`
`USPN 8,454,186 to Chen (’186 Patent)
`
`USPN 8,454,187 to Chen (’187 Patent)
`
`Wire harness, Wiley Electrical and Elec-
`tronics Engineering Dictionary (1st ed.
`2004)
`
`Wiring harness, Wiley Electrical and
`Electronics Engineering Dictionary
`(1st ed. 2004)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`1045
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Mike Wood
`
`1046
`
`1047
`
`Electrical, Wiley Electrical and Electron-
`ics Engineering Dictionary (1st ed. 2004) N/A
`Hub, Wiley Electrical and Electronics En-
`gineering Dictionary (1st ed. 2004)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`
`
`
` - viii -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`Terminal block, Wiley Electrical and Elec-
`tronics Engineering Dictionary (1st ed.
`2004)
`
`IPR2015-00802 Declaration of Mike
`Wood in Support of Petition for Inter
`Partes Review of the ’056 Patent
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`Non-Infringement Contentions of the ’056
`Patent for Group I Trees, Willis Elec. Co.
`v. Polygroup Ltd. (MCO), No. 0:15-cv-
`03443-DWF-SER (D. Minn. Aug. 28,
`2015).
`
`Non-Infringement Contentions of the ’056
`Patent for Group II Trees, Willis Elec. Co.
`v. Polygroup Ltd. (MCO), No. 0:15-cv-
`03443-DWF-SER (D. Minn. Aug. 28,
`2015).
`
`Non-Infringement Contentions of the ’056
`Patent for Group III Trees, Willis Elec.
`Co. v. Polygroup Ltd. (MCO), No. 0:15-
`cv-03443-DWF-SER (D. Minn. Aug. 28,
`2015).
`Trademark Assignment Information from
`U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, As-
`signing QUICK SET trademarks from
`General Foam Plastics Corp. to Polygroup
`(executed on Jan. 18, 2011, and recorded
`at Reel 004456, Frame 0389)
`Willis Elec. Co., Ltd. v. Polygroup Macau
`Ltd. (BVI), IPR2017-00309, Paper 1 (filed
`Nov. 21, 2016).
`Declaration of Ricky Tong
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
` - ix -
`
`
`
`1048
`
`1049
`
`1050
`
`1051
`
`1052
`
`1053
`
`1054
`
`1055
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`1056
`
`1057
`
`1058
`
`1059
`
`1060
`
`1061
`
`1062-
`1099
`
`1100
`
`1101
`
`1102-
`1104
`
`
`
`
`Default Protective Order
`Polygroup Ltd. (MCO) v. Willis Elec. Co.,
`Ltd., IPR2016-00800, -00801, -00802, Pa-
`per 28 (filed Jan. 13, 2017).
`Willis Elec. Co., Ltd. v. Polygroup Macau
`Ltd. (BVI), IPR2017- 00309, Paper 1 (filed
`Nov. 21, 2016).
`
`Polygroup Ltd. (MCO) v. Willis Elec. Co.,
`Ltd., IPR2016-00800, -00801, -00802, Pa-
`per 21 (filed Dec. 6, 2016).
`
`Correspondence Authorizing Willis to File
`its Second Motion for Additional Discov-
`ery (dated Apr. 13, 2017)
`
`Letter from Willis to Home Depot Accus-
`ing Polygroup of Infringement (dated Oct.
`8, 2014)
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Declaration of Mike Wood in Support of
`Petitioner’s Reply Brief in Inter Partes
`Review IPR2016-01613.
`
`Declaration of Mike Wood in Support of
`Petitioner’s Opposition to PO’s Motion to
`Amend in Inter Partes Review IPR2016-
`01613.
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`N/A
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
` - x -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`Deposition Transcript of Stuart Brown
`from Aug. 9, 2017(CONFIDENTIAL).
`
`Deposition Transcript of Johnny Chen
`from Aug. 1, 2017(CONFIDENTIAL).
`
`Deposition Transcript of Mike Sugar from
`July 18, 2017(CONFIDENTIAL).
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Deposition Transcript of Winston Tan
`from Aug. 1, 2017(CONFIDENTIAL).
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Lighted or Lit, WEBSTER’S NINTH NEW
`COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY (1985).
`
`Lighted or Lit, WEBSTER’S NEW RIVER-
`SIDE DICTIONARY (2001).
`
`Lighted or Lit, SHORTER OXFORD ENGLISH
`DICTIONARY (5th ed. 2002).
`
`Pre-, WEBSTER’S NINTH NEW COLLEGIATE
`DICTIONARY (1985).
`
`Pre-, WEBSTER’S NEW RIVERSIDE DIC-
`TIONARY (2001).
`
`Pre-, SHORTER OXFORD ENGLISH DIC-
`TIONARY (5th ed. 2002).
`
`Join, SHORTER OXFORD ENGLISH DIC-
`TIONARY (5th ed. 2002).
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
` - xi -
`
`
`
`1105
`
`1106
`
`1107
`
`1108-
`1109
`
`1110
`
`1111-
`1118
`
`1119
`
`1120
`
`1121
`
`1122
`
`1123
`
`1124
`
`1125
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`1126
`
`1127
`
`1128
`
`1129
`
`1130
`
`1131
`
`1132
`
`Join, WEBSTER’S ENCYCLOPEDIC UNA-
`BRIDGED DICTIONARY (2001).
`
`Attach, AM. HERITAGE COLLEGE DICTION-
`ARY (3d ed. 2000).
`
`Attach, WEBSTER’S NEW COLLEGE DIC-
`TIONARY (3d ed. 2008).
`
`Attach, WEBSTER’S ENCYCLOPEDIC UNA-
`BRIDGED DICTIONARY (2001).
`
`Affix, WEBSTER’S THIRD NEW INTERNA-
`TIONAL DICTIONARY (1993).
`
`Affix, WEBSTER’S ENCYCLOPEDIC UNA-
`BRIDGED DICTIONARY (2001).
`
`Affix, AM. HERITAGE COLLEGE DICTION-
`ARY (3d ed. 2000).
`
`1133
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Modular, WEBSTER’S THIRD NEW INT’L
`DICTIONARY (2002).
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Portion, WEBSTER’S NEW COLLEGE DIC-
`TIONARY (3d ed. 2008).
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`1134
`
`1135-
`1136
`
`1137
`
`1138-
`1141
`
`1142
`
`
`
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,056,427 to Kao
`(Kao427)
`
`May 2, 2000
`
`§ 102(b)
`
` - xii -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`Description
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,055,981 to Yao
`(Yao981)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,951,405 to Yao
`(Yao405)
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`June 6, 2006
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Oct. 4, 2005
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1143
`
`1144
`
`1145
`
`1146
`
`1147
`
`1148-
`1162
`
`1163
`
`U.S. Patent No. 8,936,379 to Chen
`(the ’379 Patent)
`
`N/A
`
`File History for U.S. Patent No. 8,936,379 N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`USPN 3,193,636 to Daniels (Daniels)
`
`Jul. 6, 1965
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,546,417 to Watts
`(Watts)
`
`Oct. 8, 1985
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1164
`
`U.S. Patent No. 5,054,622 to Lee (Lee)
`
`Oct. 8, 1991
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1165
`
`1166
`
`1167
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication
`No. 2010/0072747 to Krize (Krize)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication
`No. 2010/0000065 to Cheng (Cheng)
`
`Mar. 25, 2010
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Jan. 7, 2010
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
`2008/0149791 to Bradley (Bradley)
`
`June 26, 2008
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1168
`
`U.S. Patent No. 7,731,383 to Myer (Myer) June 8, 2010
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`U.S. Patent Application Publication No.
`2009/0040750 to Myer (Myer)
`
`U.S. Patent No. 6,514,581 to Gregory
`(Gregory)
`
`Feb. 12, 2009
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Feb. 4, 2003
`
`§ 102(b)
`
` - xiii -
`
`
`
`1169
`
`1170
`
`
`
`
`

`

`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise not-
`ed)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`
`Jan. 29, 1985
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`March 10,
`2015
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 3
`
`1171
`
`1172–
`1209
`
`1210
`
`Description
`
`U.S. Patent No. 4,496,615 to Huang
`(Huang)
`
`Intentionally Left Blank
`
`File History for USPN 8,454,186
`
`1211
`
`USPN 8,974,072 to Chen (’072 Patent)
`
`1212
`
`Declaration of Johnny Chen in Support of
`Patent Owner’s Response in Inter Partes
`Review IPR2016-01610 (CONFIDEN-
`TIAL).
`
`N/A
`
`
`
`
`
`
` - xiv -
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`Petitioner Polygroup Ltd. (MCO) (Petitioner) hereby opposes the Motion to
`
`Amend, Paper 53 (Mot.), filed by Patent Owner Willis Electric Co., Ltd. (PO).
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`PO filed a Motion to Amend that seeks to Substitute Claims 21-24 in place
`
`of canceled Claims 1, 5, 11, and 18, respectively, of U.S. Patent No. 9,044,056 (the
`
`’056 Patent). Claim 24 adds “second electrical connectors of the second electrical
`
`connector”—a term indefinite on its face. Claim 23 is also indefinite, failing to
`
`specify which “ends” connect a “last wire” with other wires of a wiring harness.
`
`Claim 23 also simply muddies the water in an attempt to avoid prior art that
`
`nonetheless would read on any reasonable construction of Claim 23. As the
`
`evidence here shows, none of these limitations, and none of the Substitute Claims,
`
`adds anything patentable to the current independent claims of the ’056 Patent.
`
`PO also fails to demonstrate the patentability of the proposed Substitute
`
`Claims over known material prior art, including Miller, Otto, Jumo, Hicks, Seghers
`
`and McLeish. PO alleges a lack of motivation to combine Miller, Otto, and Jumo
`
`(or Daniels or Falossi), but falls short. PO’s arguments are misdirected at intended
`
`use and behavior of its products, rather than the actual the scope of the proposed
`
`Substitute Claims. PO’s argument all the while ignores key teachings of the prior
`
`art used to render the claims obvious. In this way, PO has not shown Claims 21-24
`
`
`
`
`
`1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`to be patentable over the prior art.
`
`Because PO fails to set forth a prima facie case for the relief requested or
`
`satisfy its burden of proof, its motion should be denied in its entirety.
`
`II.
`
`PO’S MOTION FAILS TO COMPLY WITH BASIC PTAB RULES
`
`In a motion to amend, the Patent Owner, as the moving party, bears the
`
`burden of proof to demonstrate patentability of its proposed Substitute Claims over
`
`the prior art, and, thus, entitlement to add these claims to its patent. Idle Free Sys.,
`
`Inc. v. Bergstrom, Inc., IPR2012-00027, Paper 26, at 7 (P.T.A.B. June 11, 2013);
`
`Microsoft Corp. v. Proxyconn, Inc., 789 F.3d 1292, 1304-06 (Fed. Cir. 2015). As
`
`the Board stated in Idle Free:
`
`The burden is not on the Petitioner to show unpatentability, but on the
`patent owner to show patentable distinction over the prior art of
`record and also prior art known to the patent owner. Some
`representation should be made about the specific technical disclosure
`of the closest prior art known to the patent owner, and not just a
`conclusory remark that no prior art known to the patent owner renders
`obvious the proposed Substitute Claims. Idle Free, Paper 26, at 7.
`
`As Petitioner demonstrates herein, PO has not satisfied its burden to show
`
`that it is entitled to the amendments that it seeks. In its Motion, PO fails to meet
`
`essential requirements necessary in order for the PTAB even to consider the
`
`substance of the proposed Substitute Claims. Failing to meet the duty of candor
`
`and good faith of 37 C.F.R. §42.6, and failing to respond to the Petition’s
`
`
`
`
`
`2
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`challengges, under 37 C.F.R.
`
`
`
`
`his Motion § 42.121(aa)(2)(i), th
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Inn addition,, PO critically fails tto provide
`
`
`
`
`
`is defectivve at its outtset.
`
`
`
`
`
`claim connstructions
`
`
`
`for new cclaim
`
`
`
`terms, ccontrary too PTAB preecedent. JDJDS Uniphaase Corp.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`v. Fiber, LLLC, IPR2
`
`013-
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`00318, PPaper 45, aat 47 (P.T.A.B. Dec. 5, 2014) ((citing Idlee Free, Papper 26, at 7
`
`
`
`
`
`).
`
`
`
`MMoreover,
`
`
`
`even thouugh PO wwas free too add any
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`term to iits claims,, PO
`
`
`
`
`
`continues to raisee argumentts in its MMotion for
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`claim limiitations noot found inn the
`
`
`
`
`
`literal l
`
`
`
`
`anguage oof the claimms. Mot.
`
`
`
`2-3, 21-222; infra Paart II.C. FFor at leastt the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`above reeasons, POO’s Motionn should bee denied inn its entiretyy.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`AA.
`
`
`
`by ommitting disscussion oof materiall prior artt of recordd of whichh PO
`
`
`PO ffails its bu
`
`
`
`
`rden undeer the dutyy of candoor and goood faith
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`had nnotice
`
`
`
`PPO has thee burden to establishh a “patenntable distiinction [off the amennded
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`claim] oover the prrior art of rrecord andd also prioor art knowwn to the ppatent ownner.”
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Idle Freee, Paper 226 at 7 (emmphasis addded); 37
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`C.F.R. §422.20(c). KKnown prioor art
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`includess material
`
`
`
`prior art thhat PO shoould have mmade of reccord in thee proceedinng to
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`fulfill its duty off candor aand good ffaith. MassterImage
`
`
`
`IPR201
`
`
`
`
`5-00040, PPaper 42, aat 3 (P.T.AA.B. July 115, 2015)
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3D, Inc. vv. RealD
`
`Inc.,
`
`
`
`(precedenttial). “Prioor art
`
`
`
`
`
`of recorrd” refers
`
`
`
`to any material art:: (a) in thee prosecuttion of thee patent; (bb) of
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`asserted inn Groundss on whichh the
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`in any othher proceedding beforee the
`
`
`
`record iin the currrent proceeeding, inclluding art
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Board ddid not insttitute revieew; and (c)) of record
`
`
`
`
`
`Office iinvolving tthe patent. Id. Whilee there is nno requiremment that aa patent owwner
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`3
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`analyze expressly every individual reference cited during prosecution of the
`
`challenged patent, PO must at least group prior art references together according to
`
`their particular teachings to meet its duty of candor and good faith. Shinn Fu Co. of
`
`Am., Inc. v. Tire Hanger Corp., IPR2015-00208, Paper 24, at 8 (P.T.A.B. April 22,
`
`2016). PO fails to even meet this lenient standard.
`
`1.
`
`The prosecution history of the ’056 Patent contains material
`prior art references not discussed or even mentioned by PO
`
`Despite the reduced requirement set forth in Shinn Fu, PO has not fulfilled
`
`its duty. Specifically, PO merely states that “no references were asserted against
`
`[the issued original] claims” of the ’056 Patent. Mot. 18, 27, 29, 30. This statement
`
`alone is correct to the extent that the Office did not establish any grounds of
`
`rejection of the original claims, but PO materially omits the fact that the Examiner
`
`who allowed the original claims saw fit to cite six prior art references as context
`
`for his detailed Reasons for Allowance submitted with two Notices of
`
`Allowability. Ex. 1002, 4-5, 8-26, 36-43, 554-560.
`
`Of the six references cited by the Examiner, four of those references were
`
`not otherwise made of record in this proceeding,4 namely U.S. Pub. Applications:
`
`
`4 One such reference, U.S. Pub. App. 2012/0236546 to Chen, was a pre-grant
`
`publication of U.S. Pat. No. 8,454,187, subject to the related PTAB proceedings of
`
`IPR2016-00801, 01611, and 01612.
`
`
`
`
`
`4
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`2003/0198048 to Frederick, 2003/0206412 to Gordon, 2004/0090770 to Primeau,
`
`2006/0164834 to Kao. Each of these relates to decorative lighting products like
`
`those described or claimed in the ’056 Patent.
`
`PO knew of these material prior art teachings relating to its claims. PO
`
`should have addressed them its patentability analysis of the proposed Substitute
`
`Claims. Not only were these not addressed, PO failed to disclose these material
`
`prior-art references to the Board, constituting an obvious omission of “material art
`
`in the prosecution of the patent” and a clear violation of PO’s duty of candor
`
`required by 37 C.F.R. §42.11. Therefore, on this deficiency alone, for having failed
`
`to address all of the material prior art of record, the Motion to Amend should be
`
`denied in its entirety.
`
`2.
`
`Related proceedings involving children of the ’056 Patent
`contain material prior art references completely ignored by PO
`
`With respect to the last prong of MasterImage, PO has further failed to put
`
`Petitioner and the Board on notice as to “any material art of record in any other
`
`proceeding before the Office involving the patent.” MasterImage, Paper 42, at 3.
`
`Specifically, the ’056 Patent is a basis of priority claims for three other patent
`
`applications filed by PO: U.S. Pat. Appl. Ser. Nos. 14/725,972, 15/350,707, and
`
`15/596,421. The first of these has issued as U.S. Pat. No. 9,526,286, with the same
`
`material prior art cited as in the prosecution history of the ’056 Patent. The second
`
`application has been published and is still pending, currently rejected, also citing
`
`
`
`
`
`5
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`

`
`
`
`art made of record in the related IPR proceedings. The third application is still
`
`pending and is not yet published. Therefore, Petitioner does not have access to any
`
`new material art that may have been cited in this PTO proceeding involving the
`
`’056 Patent. PO is silent with regard to the record of this application.
`
`Even if the 15/350,707 application by itself were to introduce no new
`
`material art of record, PO’s failure to disclose the pending application’s prior art
`
`imposes an undue burden on Petitioner and on the Board to determine the scope of
`
`material art of record. And thus further supports the conclusion that PO has failed
`
`to fulfill its duty of candor and good faith to present material art of which