Intel Corporation asked the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to review six claims of Patent No. 9,529,768 (the ’768 Patent) owned by Acqis LLC. According to Monday’s petition, Intel is ultimately seeking cancellation of the claims because they are unpatentable.
The 137-page filing explained that the ’768 Patent describes a computer system that includes an attached computer module and a peripheral console. Intel challenged the asserted claims on the basis that a “person of ordinary skill in the art” would have been able to duplicate the methodologies in the asserted claims.
Among other things, the filing alleged that someone with ordinary training would have had a reasonable expectation of success in implementing the computer system due to the combination of prior art in existence before the issuance of the ’768 Patent. As such, Intel argued, the claims fall outside the scope of patentable material under federal law.
In support of its arguments, Intel detailed related computer part functions in more than 70 pages of diagrams and explanations, and submitted the declaration of an expert. The petition for review also pointed out that Acqis has asserted a large number of patents against numerous entities, including Samsung and Lenovo. Claim terms of the ’768 patent have been construed in these earlier proceedings, the petition says, but advises that the PTAB need not apply these constructions because of prior art’s nearly identical disclosures.
Intel is not a named defendant in any of the litigation involving the challenged patent, the petition explained. Additionally, the petitioner asserted that application of the six-factor test favors institution of review. Accordingly, Intel requested that the PTAB review the contested claims, hold them unpatentable, and cancel them.
The petitioner is represented by Desmarais LLP. Notably, Intel filed another inter partes review petition against Acqis on the same day, similarly challenging claims of a patent describing a computer system that includes an attached computer module and a peripheral console. The same counsel represents Intel in that petition.
