Case: 19-1704 Document: 57 Page: 1 Filed: 02/22/2021 United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ______________________ SYNQOR, INC., Appellant v. VICOR CORPORATION, Appellee ______________________ 2019-1704 ______________________ Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Patent Trial and Appeal Board in No. 95/001,702. ______________________ Decided: February 22, 2021 ______________________ STEVEN J. HOROWITZ, Sidley Austin LLP, Chicago, IL, argued for appellant. Also represented by THOMAS D. REIN; MICHAEL D. HATCHER, Dallas, TX. MATTHEW A. SMITH, Smith Baluch LLP, Menlo Park, CA, argued for appellee. Also represented by ELIZABETH LAUGHTON; ANDREW BALUCH, Washington, DC. ______________________ Before DYK, CLEVENGER, and HUGHES, Circuit Judges. Case: 19-1704 Document: 57 Page: 2 Filed: 02/22/2021 2 SYNQOR, INC. v. VICOR CORPORATION Opinion for the court filed by Circuit Judge HUGHES. Dissenting opinion filed by Circuit Judge DYK. HUGHES, Circuit Judge. SynQor, Inc. appeals the inter partes reexamination decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board holding un- patentable as obvious original claims 1–19, 28, and 31 of SynQor’s patent, U.S. Patent No. 7,072,190, as well as newly presented claims 34–38, which were proposed during the reexamination proceeding. Because decisions the Board made in previous reexamination proceedings pre- clude finding claims 1–19, 28, and 31 obvious based on the grounds relied upon by the Board, we vacate the Board’s decision as to those claims. And because the expiration of the ’190 patent renders any appeal of the Board’s decision regarding claims 34–38 moot, we also vacate the Board’s decision as to those claims. I The ’190 patent, entitled “High Efficiency Power Con- verter,” issued on July 4, 2006, with a lineage of parent ap- plications dating back to a January 1997 provisional application. The ’190 patent counts itself part of an exten- sive family including two other patents that have been in- volved in litigation reaching this court: U.S. Patent Nos. 7,564,702 and 8,023,290. See Appellant’s Br. vi–viii. These patents disclose technology for DC-DC power con- verters used in large computer systems and telecommuni- cation and data communication equipment to convert direct electric current from one voltage to another. See SynQor, Inc. v. Artesyn Techs., Inc., 709 F.3d 1365, 1372– 73 (Fed. Cir. 2013) (SynQor I). The patents claim a tech- nology SynQor dubs “Intermediate Bus Architecture,” which SynQor claims “improve[s] prior art systems by sep- arating the isolation and regulation functionality of DC-DC converters into two steps and using a single isolation stage Case: 19-1704 Document: 57 Page: 3 Filed: 02/22/2021 SYNQOR, INC. v. VICOR CORPORATION 3 to drive multiple regulation stages.” Vicor Corp. v. SynQor, Inc., 869 F.3d 1309, 1313–14, 1316–17 (Fed. Cir. 2017) (SynQor II). The ’190 patent has a lengthy litigation history with multiple board decisions and appeals in this court. Only the portions relevant to this appeal are recited here. In 2011, SynQor asserted the ’190 patent, the ’702 pa- tent, and the ’290 patent, among others, against Vicor. See SynQor, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc., No. 2:11CV54, 2014 WL 1338712 (E.D. Tex. Jan. 2, 2014). Vicor petitioned for reex- amination ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals