Invalidity dossier
US 11050808
Systems and methods for seeking within multimedia content during streaming playback
Current assignee: Divx LLC
Added 9/23/2026, 11:47:51 AM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US11050808B2
Title: Systems and methods for seeking within multimedia content during streaming playback
Patent number: US11050808B2 (application US16/565,375; pre-grant publication US20200007601A1)
Inventor: Roland Osborne
Assignee: Divx LLC (original and current assignee per the listed data)
Key dates: Priority date 2007-01-05; filing date 2019-09-09; publication date 2021-06-29. Status listed as Active, with an anticipated expiration of 2028-01-07. Classifications include H04L65/604, H04L65/60, H04L65/764, G06F16/70–16/739, and H04N21/6587 (control parameters, e.g., trick play commands).
Purpose and plain-language scope: The patent concerns seeking within multimedia content while it is being streamed. Its prior-art keywords—"media," "media file," "file," "byte ranges," and "downloaded"—indicate the disclosed approach involves requesting and tracking portions of a media file, expressed as byte ranges, as they are downloaded, so that a user can seek to a desired playback position during streaming playback rather than only after full download. The classification under H04N21/6587 (trick play commands) and G06F16/738–739 (presentation of query results, video summaries) is consistent with navigation/seeking functionality in a streaming context.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US11050808](/patent/US11050808)/en
What this excerpt does not establish: The supplied text is a bibliographic/classification excerpt; it contains no claim language, no written description, and no drawings. Therefore it does not establish the specific claimed steps, the exact seek/byte-range mechanism, any dependence on particular codecs or containers, or the scope of the claims. It also does not independently verify the listed dates, status, or assignee, which the source itself describes as assumptions or as not legally concluded. No prior-art analysis, validity assessment, or litigation findings are offered here.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:53:53 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 11050808. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.
No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.
Litigation summary
Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.
Proceedings on file (0)
All PTAB activity →AIA trial proceedings (IPR / PGR / CBM) filed at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board against this patent. Sourced from the USPTO Open Data Portal and refreshed every six hours; each proceeding number deep-links to the PTAB E2E docket.
No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged via IPR, PGR, or CBM. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs. The LLM analysis below may surface filings the ODP feed hasn’t indexed yet.
PTAB challenges
AIA trial proceedings at the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board — IPR, PGR, and CBM. Petitioners, judge panels, claim-level invalidation outcomes from Final Written Decisions, and Federal Circuit appeals. The single most important defensive datapoint after litigation history.
Assignment history
Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.