01
Jun
By Eric Schweibenz
On May 31, 2011, X2Y Attenuators, LLC of Erie, Pennsylvania (“X2Y”) filed a complaint requesting that the ITC commence an investigation pursuant to Section 337.

The complaint alleges that Intel Corporation of Santa Clara, California, Componentes Intel de Costa Rica S.A. of Costa Rica, Intel Malaysia Sdn. Bhd of Malaysia, Intel (Philippines) of the Philippines, Intel Products (Chengdu) Ltd. of China, and Intel Products (Shanghai) Ltd. of China (collectively, “Intel”), Apple Inc. of Cupertino, California (“Apple”) and Hewlett-Packard Company of Palo Alto, California (“HP”) (Intel, Apple, and HP collectively, the “Proposed Respondents”) unlawfully import into the U.S., sell for importation, and/or sell within the U.S. after importation certain microprocessors, components thereof, and products containing same that infringe U.S. Patent Nos. 6,738,249 (the ‘249 patent), 7,110,227 (the ‘227 patent), 7,609,500 (the ‘500 patent), 7,733,621 (the ‘621 patent) and 7,916,444 (the ‘444 patent) (collectively, the “asserted patents”).

According to the complaint, the asserted patents “represent a cross-section of X2Y’s patent portfolio.”  The complaint states that “[t]he heart of X2Y’s patented technology is an energy-conditioning architecture formed by layered arrangements of conductive elements and dielectric materials.”  In particular, the ‘249 patent relates to embodiments of the X2Y architecture, including its incorporation into a substrate interposed between an integrated circuit chip and a printed circuit board.  The ‘227 patent relates to embodiments of the X2Y architecture, including its implementation as an integral capacitor formed by power planes and ground planes in an integrated circuit substrate. The ‘500 patent relates to embodiments of the X2Y architecture that increase electrode shielding.  The ‘621 patent relates to embodiments of the X2Y architecture, including its incorporation into integrated circuit substrates.  Lastly, the ’444 patent relates to embodiments of the X2Y architecture and variations thereof that allow the architecture to be incorporated into different electronic structures.

In the complaint, X2Y alleges that the Proposed Respondents import and sell products that infringe the asserted patents.  In particular, the complaint alleges that Intel imports and sells allegedly infringing microprocessors and components thereof and that Apple and HP import and sell products containing Intel’s allegedly infringing microprocessors and components.  The complaint specifically names the Intel Core i3, Core i5, Core i7 and Xeon families of microprocessors as infringing products.  The complaint also names the Apple iMac, Mac Pro, and MacBook Pro series computers and the HP TouchSmart, Pavilion, Compaq, Pro, Elite, 3130, Z200, Z400, Z600, Z800, EliteBook, ProBook, ENVY, and ProLiant series computers as products that contain Intel’s allegedly infringing microprocessors and components thereof.

Regarding domestic industry, X2Y states that it has entered into partnerships with select leading domestic and foreign passive component manufacturers wherein X2Y licenses the right to manufacture and sell X2Y energy conditioning components that practice the asserted patents.  The complaint specifically names Johanson Dielectrics, Inc. of Sylmar, California (“JDI”) as an entity licensed to practice the asserted patents.  According to the complaint, JDI manufactures X2Y® series capacitors in the U.S. that are used in a variety of applications in the consumer electronics, military, aeronautical, and automotive industries and practice at least the ‘227, ‘500, ‘621, and ‘444 patents.  The complaint further states that X2Y and JDI have made substantial investments in the U.S. in the exploitation of the ‘227, ‘500, ‘621, and ‘444 patents, including  investments in plant and equipment, labor and capital, domestic engineering, and research and development.  Additionally, X2Y states it has devoted years of engineering and research and development activities to exploiting the asserted patents by establishing a market in the U.S. for licensed products, and has made substantial domestic investments in activities relating to licensing the asserted patents.  In particular, X2Y states that it “has attempted to persuade Intel to license X2Y’s technology for use in Intel’s microprocessors.”

As to related litigation, X2Y states that contemporaneously with the filing of the instant ITC complaint, it also filed suit in the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Pennsylvania alleging that Intel, Apple, and HP infringe the asserted patents.

With respect to potential remedy, X2Y requests that the Commission issue a permanent exclusion order and a permanent cease and desist order directed at the Proposed Respondents, their affiliates, and others acting on the Proposed Respondents’ behalf.
Share