Attorney Docket No. POLY056IPR2
`
`
`
`
`
`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 IPR2016-001613
`Patent 9,044,056
`__________________
`
`Petition for Inter Partes Review
`
`
`
`
`
`Mail Stop Patent Board
`Patent Trial and Appeal Board
`P.O. Box 1450
`Alexandria, VA 22313-1450
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`TABLE OF CONTENTS
`
`V.
`
`Page
`INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
`I.
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE: 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b) ................... 5
`II.
`III. THE BOARD SHOULD NOT DENY THIS PETITION UNDER
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) .......................................................................................... 5
`IV. BACKGROUND OF THE ’056 PATENT AND PRIOR ART ..................... 7
`A. Description of the Alleged Invention of the ’056 Patent ..................... 7
`B.
`Summary of the Asserted Prior Art ...................................................... 9
`1. Miller: U.S. Patent No. 4,020,201 (Ex. 1006) ........................... 9
`Otto: German Patent No. DE 84 36328.2 (Ex. 1008) .............. 11
`2.
`Jumo: French Patent No. FR 1,215,214 (Ex. 1009) ................. 12
`3.
`Seghers: U.S. Patent No. 1,974,472 (Ex. 1011) ...................... 13
`4.
`Loomis: U.S. Patent No. 8,053,042 (Ex. 1027) ....................... 13
`5.
`CLAIM CONSTRUCTION: 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)(3) ............................... 14
`A. Applicable Law .................................................................................. 14
`B.
`Person of Ordinary Skill in the Art .................................................... 14
`C.
`Construction of Claim Terms ............................................................. 15
`1.
`“light string” [all Challenged Claims] ..................................... 15
`2.
`“wiring harness” [Claims 13, 16 and 17] ................................. 16
`3.
`“electrical hub” [Claims 18 and 19] ........................................ 17
`4.
`“terminal block” [Claim 19] .................................................... 19
`VI. DETAILED EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED GROUNDS ..................... 21
`A.
`Scope and Content of the Prior Art .................................................... 21
`B. Ground 1: Claims 2 and 4 Are Rendered Obvious Under Pre-
`AIA §103(a) over Miller in View of Otto and Jumo ......................... 22
`1.
`Obviousness Analysis .............................................................. 22
`(a) Differences Between Miller and the Claimed
`Subject Matter and How Otto and Jumo Fill the
`Gaps ............................................................................... 22
`
`
`
`
`
`i
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`2.
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`(g)
`
`(b) Obviousness Rationale for Why a POSA Would
`Have Enhanced Miller with Otto and Jumo to
`Arrive at the Claimed Subject Matter ............................ 27
`(c) Obviousness Rationale for How a POSA Would
`Have Enhanced Miller with Otto and Jumo to
`Arrive at the Claimed Subject Matter ............................ 29
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claims 2 and
`4 Are Found in Miller in View of Otto and Jumo ................... 32
`(a)
`[1.P] A lighted artificial tree .......................................... 32
`(b)
`[1.1] A first tree portion aligned along a central
`vertical axis .................................................................... 32
`[1.2] The first tree portion including: a first trunk
`body having a first end, a second end, ........................... 32
`[1.3] A first electrical connector positioned in the
`second end of the first trunk body ................................. 32
`[1.4] and including a first electrical terminal
`positioned in line with the central vertical axis and
`a second electrical terminal; .......................................... 34
`[1.5] A second tree portion aligned with the central
`vertical axis .................................................................... 35
`[1.6] The second tree portion including: a second
`trunk body including a first end and a second end,
`the first end configured to couple with the second
`end of the first trunk body of the first tree portion; ....... 35
`[1.7] A second electrical connector positioned in
`the first end of the second trunk body ........................... 35
`[1.8] and including a first electrical terminal and a
`second electrical terminal, the second electrical
`terminal defining a ring shape that encircles the
`first electrical terminal, .................................................. 37
`[1.9] the second electrical connector configured to
`couple with the first electrical connector of the first
`trunk body; ..................................................................... 37
`
`(h)
`
`(i)
`
`(j)
`
`
`
`
`
`ii
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(k)
`
`(l)
`
`(m)
`
`[1.10] a light string electrically connected to the
`first and the second electrical terminals of the
`second electrical connector ............................................ 38
`[1.11] wherein upon the first tree portion being
`coupled to the second tree portion along the central
`vertical axis, the first electrical connector is
`coupled to the second electrical connector, ................... 39
`[1.12] such that the first electrical terminal of the
`first electrical connector is electrically connected
`to the first electrical terminal of the second
`electrical connector, and the second electrical
`terminal of the first electrical connector is
`electrically connected to the second electrical
`terminal of the second electrical connector ................... 39
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 2 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Otto and Jumo ............................. 40
`(a)
`[2.P] The lighted artificial tree of claim 1 ..................... 40
`(b)
`[2.1] wherein the first electrical terminal of the
`first electrical connector comprises a pin terminal
`and the ring shape of the second electrical terminal
`of the second electrical connector comprises a
`cylindrical ring shape. .................................................... 40
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 4 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Otto and Jumo ............................. 41
`(a)
`[4.P] The lighted artificial tree of claim 1 ..................... 41
`(b)
`[4.1] further comprising a light string in electrical
`connection with the first electrical connector ................ 41
`C. Ground 2: Claim 13 and 16–17 Are Rendered Obvious over
`Miller in View of Seghers .................................................................. 42
`1.
`Obviousness Analysis .............................................................. 42
`(a) Differences Between Miller and the Claimed
`Subject Matter and How Seghers Fills the Gap ............ 42
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`
`
`
`
`iii
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`2.
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`(e)
`
`(b) Obviousness Rationale for Why a POSA Would
`Have Enhanced Miller with Seghers to Arrive at
`the Claimed Subject Matter ........................................... 45
`(c) Obviousness Rationale for How a POSA Would
`Have Enhanced Miller with Seghers to Arrive at
`the Claimed Subject Matter ........................................... 46
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claims 13,
`16 and 17 Are Found in Miller in View of Seghers ................ 47
`(a)
`[11.P] A lighted artificial tree ........................................ 47
`(b)
`[11.1] A first tree portion aligned along a central
`vertical axis .................................................................... 47
`[11.2] The first tree portion including: a first trunk
`body having a first trunk wall, ....................................... 47
`[11.3] A first electrical wiring harness assembly
`comprising: a first electrical connector positioned
`substantially within the first trunk body and
`including a first electrical terminal and a second
`electrical terminal; ......................................................... 48
`[11.4] A first wiring harness positioned at least in
`part within the first trunk body and comprising a
`first wire and a second wire, the first wire
`electrically connected to the first electrical
`terminal and the second wire electrically connected
`to the second electrical terminal; and ............................ 49
`[11.5] A first light string having a first wire, a
`plurality of intermediate wires, a plurality of light
`element assemblies and a last wire, ............................... 49
`[11.6] A first end of the first wire being electrically
`connected to the first wire of the first wiring
`harness, a second end of the first wire being
`electrically connected to a first light element
`assembly of the plurality of light element
`assemblies, ..................................................................... 51
`
`(f)
`
`(g)
`
`
`
`
`
`iv
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(i)
`
`(h)
`
`[11.7] each of the intermediate wires being
`electrically connected at a first end to one of the
`plurality of light element assemblies and
`electrically connected at a second end to another of
`the plurality of light element assemblies, ...................... 51
`[11.8] and a last wire electrically connected to a
`last light element assembly of the plurality of light
`element assemblies at a first end and electrically
`connected to the second wire of the first wiring
`harness at a second end .................................................. 52
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 13 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Seghers ........................................ 53
`(a)
`[13.P] The lighted artificial tree of claim 11 ................. 53
`(b)
`[13.1] wherein neither the first wire of the first
`light string, nor the last wire of the first light string
`are wrapped about more than half of the
`intermediate wires. ......................................................... 53
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 16 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Seghers ........................................ 54
`(a)
`[16.P] The lighted artificial tree of claim 11 ................. 54
`(b)
`[16.1] wherein each of the plurality of light
`element assemblies includes a two-wire lamp
`holder ............................................................................. 54
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 17 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Seghers ........................................ 54
`(a)
`[17.P] The lighted artificial tree of claim 11 ................. 54
`(b)
`[17.1] further comprising a second tree portion
`aligned with the central vertical axis, and
`mechanically and electrically coupled to the first
`tree portion ..................................................................... 55
`
`3.
`
`4.
`
`5.
`
`v
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`2.
`
`(c)
`
`(d)
`
`D. Ground 3: Claims 18–19 Are Rendered Obvious over Miller in
`View of Loomis .................................................................................. 55
`1.
`Obviousness Analysis .............................................................. 55
`(a) Differences Between Miller and the Claimed
`Subject Matter and How Loomis Fills the Gap ............. 55
`(b) Obviousness Rationale for Why a POSA Would
`Have Enhanced Miller with Loomis to Arrive at
`the Claimed Subject Matter ........................................... 59
`(c) Obviousness Rationale for How a POSA Would
`Have Enhanced Miller with Loomis to Arrive at
`the Claimed Subject Matter ........................................... 60
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 18 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Loomis ......................................... 61
`(a)
`[18.P] A lighted artificial tree, comprising: ................... 61
`(b)
`[18.1] a power cord configured to receive electrical
`power from an external power source; .......................... 61
`[18.2] a first tree portion aligned along a central
`vertical axis .................................................................... 61
`[18.3] The first tree portion including: a first trunk
`body having a first end, a second end, ........................... 61
`[18.4] a first electrical connector positioned in the
`second end of the first trunk body ................................. 61
`[18.5] and including a first electrical terminal and
`a second electrical terminal, the first and second
`electrical terminals electrically connected to the
`power cord; and ............................................................. 63
`[18.6] a second tree portion aligned with the
`central vertical axis ........................................................ 63
`[18.7] The second tree portion including: a second
`trunk body including a first end and a second end,
`the first end configured to couple with the second
`end of the first trunk body of the first tree portion; ....... 64
`
`(e)
`
`(f)
`
`(g)
`
`(h)
`
`
`
`
`
`vi
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`
`(i)
`
`(j)
`
`(k)
`
`(l)
`
`(m)
`
`[18.8] a second electrical connector positioned in
`the first end of the second trunk body and
`including a first electrical terminal and a second
`electrical terminal; ......................................................... 64
`[18.9] an electrical hub positioned inside the
`second trunk body and electrically connected to
`the first and second electrical connectors of the
`second electrical connector; ........................................... 65
`[18.10] a first light string electrically connected to
`the electrical hub; ........................................................... 66
`[18.11] a second light string electrically connected
`to the electrical hub; ...................................................... 67
`[18.12] wherein upon the first tree portion being
`coupled to the second tree portion along the central
`vertical axis, the first electrical connector is
`coupled to the second electrical connector, such
`that the first electrical terminal of the first
`electrical connector is electrically connected to the
`first electrical terminal of the second electrical
`connector, and the second electrical terminal of the
`first electrical connector is electrically connected
`to the second electrical terminal of the second
`electrical connector, thereby electrically
`connecting the power cord to the electrical hub and
`the first and second light strings .................................... 68
`Rule 104(b)(4) Analysis—Each Element of Claim 19 Is
`Found in Miller in View of Loomis ......................................... 69
`(a)
`[19.P] The lighted artificial tree of claim 18 ................. 69
`(b)
`[19.1] wherein the hub comprises a terminal block ...... 69
`
`vii
`
`
`
`3.
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`Table of Contents
`(continued)
`
`Page
`VII. Mandatory Notices, Standing and Fees ........................................................ 70
`A.
`Real Parties-In-Interest: 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(1) ................................ 70
`B.
`Related Matters: 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(2) ............................................ 71
`C.
`Petitioner’s Lead and Back-up Counsel and Service
`Information: 37 C.F.R. § 42.8(b)(3) and (4) ...................................... 73
`D. Grounds for Standing: 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(a) .................................... 74
`E.
`Payment of Fees: 37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ................................................ 74
`VIII. CONCLUSION ............................................................................................. 74
`
`
`
`
`
`viii
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`TABLE OF AUTHORITIES
`
`
`CASES
`Cuozzo Speed Techs., LLC v. Lee,
`579 U.S. ____, 136 S. Ct. 2131 (2016)............................................................... 15
`
`Page(s)
`
`Graham v. John Deere Co.,
`383 U.S. 1 (1966) ................................................................................................ 22
`
`In re Aslanian,
`590 F.2d 911 (C.C.P.A. 1979) ............................................................................ 11
`
`In re Keller,
`642 F.2d 413 (C.C.P.A. 1981) ...................................................................... 32, 48
`
`In re Mouttet,
`686 F.3d 1322 (Fed. Cir. 2012) .................................................................... 27, 32
`
`In re Sneed,
`710 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir. 1983) .......................................................................... 48
`
`KSR Int’l Co. v. Teleflex Inc.,
`550 U.S. 398 (2007) .....................................................................................passim
`
`Perfect Web Techs., Inc. v. InfoUSA Inc.,
`587 F.3d 1324 (Fed. Cir. 2009) .......................................................................... 22
`
`PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD DECISIONS
`
`Conopco, Inc. v. The Procter & Gamble Co.,
`IPR2014-00628, Paper 23 (PTAB Mar. 20, 2015) .......................................... 7
`
`Eleckta, Inc. v. Varian Med. Sys., Inc.,
`IPR2016-00380, Paper 12 (PTAB June 21, 2016) .......................................... 6
`
`Eleckta, Inc. v. Varian Med. Sys., Inc.,
`IPR2016-00317, Paper 12 (PTAB June 7, 2016) ............................................ 6
`
`Life Techs. Corp. v. Unisone Strategic IP, Inc.,
`CBM2016-00025, Paper 7 (PTAB July 5, 2016) ............................................ 7
`
`
`
`
`
`ix
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Stellar Energy Ams., Inc. v. TAS Energy Inc.,
`IPR2016-00294, Paper 12 (PTAB July 8, 2015) ............................................. 7
`
`
`
`STATUTES
`
`Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b) .................................................................. 10, 12, 13, 14
`
`Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(e) ..................................................................................... 14
`
`Pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 103 ................................................................................... 21, 22
`
`35 U.S.C. § 112 ........................................................................................................ 16
`
`35 U.S.C. § 311(b) ................................................................................................... 16
`
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d) ............................................................................................. 6, 7, 8
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.8 ........................................................................................... 72, 73, 74
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.103 ................................................................................................... 74
`
`37 C.F.R. § 42.104 ............................................................................................passim
`
`
`
`MANUAL OF PATENT EXAMINING PROCEDURE
`
`MPEP § 2111 ....................................................................................................passim
`
`
`
`x
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 2
`
`Description
`
`TABLE OF EXHIBITS1
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise
`noted)
`
`May 8, 2012
`(filing date)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`USPN 9,044,056 to Chen (the ’056 Patent)
`(Patent under Inter Partes Review)
`
`File History for USPN 9,044,056
`
`Patent Owner Preliminary Response from
`IPR2014-01263
`
`Decision on Institution from IPR2014-01263 N/A
`
`Declaration of Mike Wood in Support of
`Petition for Inter Partes Review of
`the ’056 Patent
`
`N/A
`
`1001
`
`1002
`
`1003
`
`1004
`
`1005
`
`1006
`
`1007
`
`1008
`
`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 36328.2 to Otto (Otto)
`(with German version; English translation;
`and Translation Certification of Wheatleigh
`Dunham per 37 C.F.R. § 42.63(b))
`
`Apr. 4, 1985
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`
`1 For the Board’s convenience, this Table of Exhibits includes all references cited
`in this Petition and in the corresponding Expert Declaration (Ex. 1005).
`Accordingly, the Table of Exhibits in the Petition and Declaration are identical.
`2 For ease of review, Petitioner adopts the following citation convention for this
`Petition and accompanying Declaration. 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 references/translations and supporting papers (file history,
`Prior IPR papers, definitions, C.V.) are cited by stamped pagination number.
`
`xi
`
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 2
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise
`noted)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`Apr. 15, 1960 § 102(b)
`
`1009
`
`1010
`
`1011
`
`1012
`
`1013
`
`1014
`
`1015
`
`1016
`
`1017
`
`1018
`
`1019
`
`1020
`
`1021
`
`1022
`
`1023
`
`1024
`
`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))
`
`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)
`
`USPN 7,132,139 to Yang (Yang)
`
`USPN 2,563,713 to (Frei)
`
`USPN 735,010 to Zahl (Zahl)
`
`USPN 1,495,695 to Karr (Karr)
`
`June 22, 2004 § 102(b)
`
`Nov. 7, 2006
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Aug. 7, 1951
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`July 28, 1903
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`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)
`
`USPN 3,131,112 to Abramson (Abramson)
`
`Apr. 28, 1964 § 102(b)
`
`USPN 3,970,834 to Smith (Smith)
`
`USPN 3,985,924 to Pritza (Pritza)
`
`July 20, 1976
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`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)
`
`
`
`
`
`xii
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 2
`
`Description
`
`1027
`
`USPN 8,053,042 to Loomis (Loomis)
`
`Type of
`Prior Art
`(Pre-AIA
`35 U.S.C.)
`§ 102(e)
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise
`noted)
`
`July 14, 2009
`(earliest
`claimed
`priority date)
`
`USPN 3,521,216 to Tolegian (Tolegian)
`
`July 21, 1970
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`1028
`
`1029
`
`US 2010/0099287 to Colburn et al. (Colburn) Oct. 2, 2008
`(earliest
`claimed
`priority date)
`
`1030
`
`US 2010/0159713 to Nishihira et al.
`(Nishihira)
`
`Dec. 19, 2008
`(earliest
`claimed
`priority date)
`
`§ 102(e)
`
`§ 102(e)
`
`1031
`
`1032
`
`1033
`
`1034
`
`1035
`
`1036
`
`1037
`
`1038
`
`1039
`
`1040
`
`
`
`
`
`USPN 3,107,966 to Bonhomme
`(Bonhomme 966)
`
`USPN 3,470,527 to Bonhomme
`(Bonhomme 527)
`
`Oct. 22, 1963
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`Sept. 30, 1969 § 102(b)
`
`USPN 3,585,564 to Skjervoll (Skjervoll)
`
`June 15, 1971 § 102(b)
`
`USPN 5,091,834 to Kao et al. (Kao)
`
`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)
`
`GB 2 169 198 to Fung (Fung)
`
`Dec. 25, 2007 § 102(b)
`
`July 9, 1986
`
`§ 102(b)
`
`xiii
`
`
`
`

`
`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
`
`
`
`Exhibit
`No. 2
`
`Description
`
`Publication
`Date (unless
`otherwise
`noted)
`
`1041
`
`1042
`
`1043
`
`1044
`
`1045
`
`1046
`
`1047
`
`1048
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`USPN 8,454,186 to Chen (’186 Patent)
`
`USPN 8,454,187 to Chen (’187 Patent)
`
`Wire harness, Wiley Electrical and
`Electronics Engineering Dictionary
`(1st ed. 2004)
`
`Wiring harness, Wiley Electrical and
`Electronics Engineering Dictionary
`(1st ed. 2004)
`
`Curriculum Vitae of Mike Wood
`
`Electrical, Wiley Electrical and Electronics
`Engineering Dictionary
`(1st ed. 2004)
`
`Hub, Wiley Electrical and Electronics
`Engineering Dictionary
`(1st ed. 2004)
`
`Terminal Block, Wiley Electrical and
`Electronics Engineering Dictionary
`(1st ed. 2004)
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`N/A
`
`xiv
`
`
`
`

`
`
`
`Petitioner Polygroup requests Inter Partes Review (IPR) of Claims 2, 4, 13
`
`and 16–19 (the Challenged Claims) of USPN 9,044,056 (the ’056 Patent) (Ex.
`
`1001).
`
`I.
`
`INTRODUCTION
`
`Artificial Christmas trees with lights have been well-known for over one
`
`hundred years (e.g., Ex. 1015 (patent from 1903)), and have not changed
`
`dramatically in that time. Ex. 1005, Declaration of Mike Wood in Support of
`
`Request for Inter Partes Review of the ’056 Patent, ¶¶ 26–56, 62, 76–82. As early
`
`as the 1920s, artificial trees had detachable trunk sections with collapsible
`
`branches for convenient storage and shipping and were lit by candles. See, e.g., Ex.
`
`1016, Fig. 1; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 28–29. Over time, electrically powered lights and
`
`corresponding wires replaced candles. Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 27–40. For example, Seghers,
`
`which issued in 1934, teaches “a lighting circuit especially adapted for miniature
`
`lamps used in decorative lighting for Christmas trees.” Ex. 1011, 1:1–3, Figs. 1–4;
`
`Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 31, 77, 82, 131–33.
`
`As with the wiring of many electrical devices in the home, there was a desire
`
`to hide at least a portion of the wiring within the device. Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 29–40, 49–
`
`56, 64, 69, 116–55. By the mid-1920s, trees contained electric circuits connected to
`
`light lamps on branches, with hollow trunk portions to hide the corresponding
`
`electrical wires. Ex. 1017 (Harris), Figs. 2–4; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 29–30. Indeed, the ’056
`
`1
`
`

`
`
`
`Patent specifically references Harris, thus acknowledging that electrically
`
`connecting trunk sections that provide electricity to lights on branches with
`
`electrical wires inside the trunks has long been known. Ex. 1001, 2:5–18.
`
`Similarly, Miller teaches a tree with “readily assembled hollow sleeved trunk
`
`members having wiring and limb sockets removably arranged therein so that the
`
`wiring is housed and concealed within the trunk members and limbs” and with
`
`light strings positioned on branches. Ex. 1006, 1:47–56, Figs. 2–3; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 37,
`
`116–21. Further, as shown by Seghers, electrically powered light strings have been
`
`known at least since 1934. Ex. 1011, 1:1–3, Figs. 1–4; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 31, 77, 82,
`
`131–33.
`
`Artisans also began modifying the connections in artificial trees by placing
`
`electrical connectors in the ends of trunk sections. Ex. 1017, 2:36–54, Fig. 4; Ex.
`
`1005, ¶¶ 48–56. Harris, for example, provided male and female electrical
`
`connectors in the ends of trunk sections. Ex. 1017, 2:36–54, Fig. 4; Ex. 1005,
`
`¶¶ 29–30. Similarly, DeVicaris teaches “electrically conductive attaching means”
`
`located at the upper end and lower end of each trunk section. Ex. 1023, 3:67–4:11,
`
`Fig. 2; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 38, 50. Likewise, Loomis teaches “a plurality of tree trunk
`
`segments that couple together to provide electrical power to receptacles on each of
`
`the segments.” Ex. 1027, 3:16–19, Figs. 1–2. Artisans also modified the
`
`connections between trunks for ease of assembly. See, e.g., Ex. 1008 (Otto),
`
`2
`
`

`
`
`
`18:23–27; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 26–56, 122–26. Otto, for example, uses coaxial electrical
`
`and mechanical connections between trunk sections (and between the trunks and
`
`branches) to transmit power through the tree and to the lights. Ex. 1008, 20:23–
`
`21:2, Figs. 1–2; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 122–26. These connections simplify assembly, and
`
`allow users to simultaneously connect the mechanical and electrical components of
`
`the trunk sections. Ex. 1008, 18:23–27, Figs. 1–2; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 122–26.
`
`Of course, electrical and mechanical connectors that connect independent of
`
`rotational orientation, such as Otto, are not unique to the artificial tree art. Ex.
`
`1005, ¶¶ 57–75. Jumo, for example, teaches connectors with simultaneous
`
`electrical and mechanical connections for use with “a user device that can be of
`
`absolutely any type whatsoever.” Ex. 1009, 5:18–23, Figs. 1–4; see also Ex. 1010
`
`(McLeish), 10:17–21 (teaching cylindrically shaped coaxial connectors for use
`
`“with any type of electrical appliance”); Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 64, 72–73, 127–35. These
`
`connectors have broad applicability to devices where concurrent electrical and
`
`mechanical connections would be helpful. Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 57–61. The prior art shows
`
`this broad applicability extends to, among other things, sections of light fixtures
`
`(Ex. 1009, 5:18–23, Figs. 1, 4; Ex. 1010, 10:18–21) and between trunks of an
`
`artificial tree (Ex. 1008, 18:19–27, Figs. 1–2). Ex 1005, ¶¶ 116–30.
`
`Despite this prior art, the ’056 Patent issued with claims to nothing more
`
`than a common artificial tree with combinations of well-known trunk connectors
`
`3
`
`

`
`
`
`and light strings. See Ex. 1001; Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 83–95. For example, the Challenged
`
`Claims are directed to a coaxial-type connector electrically connected to a generic
`
`light string (Claims 2 and 4), a generic electrical connector and wiring harness and
`
`a series-connected light string (Claims 13, 16 and 17) and two electrical connectors
`
`connected to a generic electrical hub, which is electrically connected to two
`
`generic light strings (Claims 18 and 19). Id. All of the claimed connectors and light
`
`strings have existed in the prior art for many years. Id. There is nothing novel or
`
`non-obvious about the claims, as shown by the striking similarities between the
`
`inventions claimed in the ’056 Patent (Ex. 1001) and those disclosed in Miller (Ex.
`
`1006) and Loomis (Ex. 1027):
`
`’056
`Patent
`Fig. 2
`
`Miller
`Fig. 2
`
`Loomis
`Fig. 1
`
`
`
`
`
`
`
`Accordingly, Miller provides all elements of the Challenged Claims with the
`
`possible exception of details of the claimed electrical connectors or light strings.
`
`4
`
`

`
`
`
`But those features were well-known in the art (e.g., Otto, Jumo, Seghers, Loomis)
`
`and a person of ordinary skill in the art at the time of the alleged invention (a
`
`POSA) would have used that art to enhance Miller. Ex. 1005, ¶¶ 137–252.
`
`II.
`
`IDENTIFICATION OF CHALLENGE: 37 C.F.R. § 42.104(b)
`
`Petitioner challenges Claims 2, 4, 13, and 16–19 as follows:
`
`Ground Claims
`1
`2, 4
`2
`13, 16–17
`3
`18–19
`
`Pre-AIA 35
`U.S.C. Basis
`§ 103(a)
`§ 103(a)
`§ 103(a)
`
`References
`Miller in view of Otto and Jumo
`Miller in view of Seghers
`Miller in view of Loomis
`
`
`Ground 1 shows how Otto would have motivated a POSA to enhance Miller’s
`
`artificial tree with Jumo’s connector to render Claims 2 and 4 obvious. Ground 2
`
`shows how a POSA would have been motivated to enhance Miller’s tree with
`
`Seghers’ light string, rendering Claims 13, 16, and 17 obvious. Ground 3 shows
`
`how a POSA would have been motivated to enhance Miller’s tree with Loomis’
`
`electrical connector, rendering Claims 18–19 obvious.3
`
`III. THE BOARD SHOULD NOT DENY THIS PETITION UNDER
`35 U.S.C. § 325(d)
`
`Under 35 U.S.C. § 325(d), the Board’s consideration of a petition “may take
`
`into account whether, and reject the petition or request because, the same or
`
`
`3 Petitioner reserves the right to rebut any secondary consideration evidence
`
`provided in this IPR.
`
`5
`
`

`
`
`
`substantially the same prior art or arguments were previously presented to the
`
`Office.” Although the ’056 Patent is currently involved in a parallel IPR
`
`proceeding, see IPR2016-00802 (Parallel IPR), the Board should institute this
`
`Petition because it is directed at different claims than the Parallel IPR. Specifically,
`
`since the filing of the Parallel IPR, Patent Owner has identified the claims it alleges
`
`are infringed by Petitioner in a related civil suit. Willis Elec. Co. v. Polygroup Ltd.,
`
`No. 0:15-cv-03443-WMW-KMM (D. Minn. filed Aug. 28, 2015). The Challenged
`
`Claims consist of those claims asserted against Petitioner that were not addressed
`
`in the Parallel IPR.
`
`The Board has found parallel IPR proceedings challenging different claims
`
`in a single patent to be permissible. As the Board has explained, “[g]iven that
`
`petitions for inter partes review are subject to page limits, it is not unreasonable for
`
`petitioners to file (and pay the fees for) multiple petitions to address challenges to
`
`different claims in a single patent, even if those challenges rely on the same prior
`
`art and similar reasoning.” Eleckta, Inc. v. Varian Med. Sys., Inc., IPR2016-00380,
`
`Paper 12, at 21 (PTAB June 21, 2016). The Board “see[s] no reason to bar
`
`Petitioner from challenging different claims at different times in separate
`
`petitions.” Eleckta, Inc. v. Varian Med. Sys., Inc., IPR2016-00317, Paper 12, at 19
`
`(PTAB June 7, 2016). Thus, the Board has repeatedly rejecte