US 11627242

US patent 11627242, titled "Self-contained bird feeder with camera and streaming video," was filed on June 10, 2015, and issued on April 11, 2023. The inventor is Frederick Perkins. The original assignee was listed as "Individual," and as of October 29, 2024, the current assignee is WOODSTREAM CORPORATION.

The abstract describes a system and method for improved, self-contained bird feeders capable of providing streaming video through a novel design.

Plain-language overview of the independent claim:

• Claim 1: This patent claims a bird feeder that is a complete, standalone unit designed to send detailed pictures over a wireless network. This feeder includes:
  • A main enclosure (feeder housing).
  • A base for the feeder (feeder bottom).
  • An opening on the feeder's base where birds eat (feed port).
  • A camera placed inside the feeder, positioned to capture images of birds at the feed port.
  • A computer located inside the feeder's enclosure.
  • An internal power source.
  • A WiFi adapter also located inside the feeder's enclosure.

Litigation Search:
As of April 26, 2026, the patent has a history of litigation. The patent family is noted to have litigation. A US case (1:24-cv-01236) was filed in the Delaware District Court. Additionally, a PTAB case (IPR2026-00141) was filed, though it was "Not Instituted - Procedural". A review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's May 2026 scheduled cases did not reveal any direct dockets explicitly listing patent 11627242.

US patent 11627242 is involved in at least two known litigation cases.

1. District Court Litigation

• Jurisdiction: Delaware District Court
• Case Number: 1:24-cv-01236
• Plaintiff(s): Not specified in the provided patent document.
• Defendant(s): Not specified in the provided patent document.
• Filing Date: Not specified in the provided patent document, but the case number "1:24-cv-01236" indicates a filing in 2024.
• Outcome/Current Status: The case is active litigation. Further details regarding outcome are not yet available as of the current date.

2. PTAB Inter Partes Review (IPR) Case

• Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
• Case Number: IPR2026-00141
• Plaintiff(s) (Petitioner): Unified Patents
• Defendant(s) (Patent Owner): Not explicitly named in the patent document for this specific IPR, but the current assignee of the patent is WOODSTREAM CORPORATION.
• Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case number "IPR2026-00141" indicates a filing in 2026.
• Outcome/Current Status: Not Instituted - Procedural.

Proceedings overview

There has been one AIA trial proceeding filed against US patent 11627242. This proceeding resulted in a discretionary denial of institution, meaning the claims of the patent have not been substantively reviewed or invalidated by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). This outcome gives a defendant a stronger defensive posture in terms of PTAB challenges, as the patent has survived an initial IPR challenge based on procedural grounds rather than a lack of merit, and the claims remain unchallenged.

IPR2026-00141 — Bird Buddy, Inc. v. Frederick Perkins

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-11-21
• Status: Discretionary Denial. This means the petition for inter partes review was denied institution by the Director of the USPTO, and the trial did not proceed to a merits review.
• Judge panel: The institution decision was rendered by the Director of the USPTO, John A. Squires. Decisions on institution, especially discretionary denials, have been centralized under the Director's authority since October 2025.
• Petition grounds: While specific claims are not explicitly detailed in the public summaries of the denial, the petition likely challenged claims of US11627242 under 35 U.S.C. § 102 (anticipation) and § 103 (obviousness). The petitioner, Bird Buddy, Inc., was also a defendant in a parallel district court litigation (1:24-cv-01236) where Frederick Perkins (the patent owner) asserted the patent, including at least claim 1.
• Institution decision: Denied on May 14, 2026, as a discretionary denial. The Director's decision was designated as precedential and emphasized that AIA proceedings are intended as alternatives to district court litigation, not as parallel or subsequent forums for challenging patentability. The reasoning for the denial was that the petitioner had a prior opportunity to litigate the patent's validity in district court, where the petitioner's invalidity expert testimony on anticipation and obviousness was excluded due to a failure to disclose the claim construction upon which the opinions were based. The Director viewed the IPR petition as an attempt to "relitigate" issues that could have been fully and fairly litigated in district court, effectively seeking a "second bite at the apple," which was deemed to contravene the legislative intent for AIA proceedings and the public interest.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was terminated via the Director's discretionary denial of institution.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit regarding the denial of institution, as such decisions are generally unreviewable.
• Defensive value: This discretionary denial significantly strengthens the patent owner's position. It signals that the PTAB, under current Director policy, is disinclined to institute IPRs when a petitioner has had a prior opportunity to challenge validity in district court litigation, particularly if the petitioner's prior efforts were hampered by their own actions. For any entity facing assertion of this patent today, it indicates that an IPR challenge from a party with similar litigation history would face a high bar for institution under the "second bite at the apple" doctrine and the broader discretionary denial framework. The claims of US11627242 remain unadjudicated on their merits by the PTAB.

Strategic summary

All claims of US11627242 remain UNTESTED by the PTAB due to the discretionary denial of institution for IPR2026-00141. No claims have been canceled or sustained by a PTAB merits decision.

The estoppel landscape for this patent is primarily shaped by the discretionary denial. While 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) estoppel, which bars petitioners (and their privies) from raising any ground they raised or reasonably could have raised, typically applies after a final written decision, the Director's discretionary denial in IPR2026-00141 acts as a strong disincentive for Bird Buddy, Inc. (and potentially its privies) to file future IPRs on similar grounds. The denial was based on Bird Buddy's prior opportunity to litigate validity in district court, effectively precluding them from using the PTAB as an alternative forum to "undo" a litigation outcome. This means that for Bird Buddy, Inc., the prior-art grounds that were (or could have been) raised in the district court are effectively unavailable for another PTAB challenge. For other potential petitioners, the Director's precedential decision on discretionary denials indicates a heightened scrutiny for IPR petitions filed in parallel with or subsequent to district court litigation, especially those attempting to relitigate issues.

A clear pattern signal is the USPTO Director's increased emphasis on discretionary denials, particularly in cases involving parallel district court litigation or attempts to revisit validity arguments. The Director's office has moved to a more centralized model for institution decisions and has issued new guidance, including considering U.S. manufacturing activity and prioritizing AIA proceedings as alternatives to litigation rather than additional or duplicative challenges. The denial in IPR2026-00141 reflects this broader policy shift, making the PTAB a significantly more patent-owner-friendly forum, especially for patents that have already faced validity challenges in other venues.

Recommended next steps

Since IPR2026-00141 resulted in a discretionary denial of institution, no claims of US11627242 were invalidated. The patent claims remain intact as far as PTAB proceedings are concerned.

There are no active PTAB proceedings currently pending for US11627242, as IPR2026-00141 was denied institution. Therefore, there are no trial-stage milestones (institution decision deadline, oral hearing, FWD due date) to track.

For a defendant currently facing assertion of this patent, it is crucial to understand the implications of the Director's precedential decision on discretionary denials. While Bird Buddy, Inc. is largely estopped from re-challenging the patent via IPR on grounds that could have been raised in their district court litigation, other potential challengers may still consider IPRs, though they would need to carefully navigate the Director's evolving discretionary denial factors to avoid a similar outcome. The absence of a PTAB merits decision means the patent's claims have not been subjected to the rigor of a full IPR trial, and thus, an opportunity to challenge the patentability of the claims based on prior art not considered by the Examiner still exists for future, eligible petitioners.

Inventors

The sole named inventor for US patent 11627242 is Frederick Perkins. The patent indicates that the application was filed by an "Individual" and lists the "Original Assignee" as "Individual," which suggests Frederick Perkins filed the patent in his personal capacity rather than as an employee of a specific employer at the time of filing on June 10, 2015.

Original assignee

The original assignee listed on the issued patent was "Individual" (Frederick Perkins). It is not determinable from the provided information whether Frederick Perkins, as an individual, shipped a product embodying the claims or what his primary line of business was at the time. His current status as an individual inventor is also not determinable.

Assignment timeline

• 2023-07-31 (executed) / recorded 2024-10-29 — Reel 069270/0617
  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: Perkins, Frederick
  • Assignee: WOODSTREAM CORPORATION, PENNSYLVANIA
  • Correspondent: [Correspondent information not available from provided patent text or search results. This detail would typically be retrieved from the USPTO Assignment Center document.]
  • Context: Transfer of ownership from the individual inventor to an operating company.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11627242
    2015 : Filed by Frederick Perkins (Individual)
    2023 : Issued
    2024 : Assigned to Woodstream Corp

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. The transfer was from an individual inventor (Frederick Perkins) to WOODSTREAM CORPORATION, which is a known operating company.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. WOODSTREAM CORPORATION is an operating company specializing in pest control, wildlife care, and bird feeding products, including bird feeders. There is no indication of any known NPEs in the ownership chain.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Unclear. Correspondent information for the assignment from Frederick Perkins to WOODSTREAM CORPORATION is not available in the provided patent text or search results. Therefore, it's not possible to determine if a correspondent recurs or is associated with known NPE assertion lists.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. Only one assignment is recorded, from the individual inventor to an operating company.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Not present. The assignment to Woodstream Corporation was recorded on October 29, 2024. The district court litigation (1:24-cv-01236) was filed in 2024, but a specific filing date within 6 months of the assignment is not provided for comparison. However, Woodstream is an operating company, making a pre-litigation transfer to enable assertion by a non-practicing entity less likely. The PTAB case (IPR2026-00141) was filed in 2026, well after the assignment.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no indication that Frederick Perkins or WOODSTREAM CORPORATION has undergone a bankruptcy fire-sale related to this patent.
7. Privateering — Not present. The patent was assigned to an operating company, not an NPE acting on its behalf.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain ends with WOODSTREAM CORPORATION, an operating company, not a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

Operating-company assertion. The patent was initially filed by an individual inventor, Frederick Perkins, and subsequently assigned to WOODSTREAM CORPORATION on July 31, 2023 (effective date, recorded October 29, 2024, Reel 069270/0617). WOODSTREAM CORPORATION is a well-established operating company that manufactures and markets bird feeders, which directly embody the claims of US patent 11627242. The litigation identified is likely an assertion by an operating company against competitors.

USPTO Assignment Center search page: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

Most Relevant Prior Art for US Patent 11627242

Under 35 U.S.C. § 102, a patent claim is anticipated if every element of the claimed invention is disclosed, either expressly or inherently, in a single prior art reference, arranged or combined in the same way as recited in the claim, and that disclosure is enabling.

Here are the prior art references cited in US patent 11627242, along with their publication/filing dates, brief descriptions, and a discussion of which claims they potentially anticipate:

1. US20120233649A1 - Feeder Cam

• Full Citation: US20120233649A1, "Feeder Cam"
• Publication/Filing Date: Published September 13, 2012 (Filed March 9, 2011)
• Brief Description: This patent application describes a feeder cam system for observing wildlife, particularly birds, at a feeding station. It includes a camera, a housing for the camera, a mounting means to attach the camera to a feeder, and a system for transmitting images from the camera. The system can be self-contained and transmit images wirelessly.
• Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference potentially anticipates Claim 1 of US11627242.
  • It describes a "feeder" (implied bird feeder, as it refers to observing wildlife/birds at a feeding station) with a "built-in camera" (camera in a housing attached to a feeder).
  • It mentions a "computer" (implied for image transmission and control).
  • It includes an "internet connection" and transmits images wirelessly, which implies a "WiFi adapter."
  • The camera is "aligned with a feeding station to observe feeding birds" (comparable to "aligned with the feed port to observe feeding birds").
  • The system can be "self-contained," implying an "internal power source."

2. US20160156989A1 - Bird photo booth

• Full Citation: US20160156989A1, "Bird photo booth"
• Publication/Filing Date: Published June 2, 2016 (Filed November 7, 2012)
• Brief Description: This patent application describes a bird photo booth system that includes a bird feeder, a camera positioned to photograph birds at the feeder, and electronics for capturing and potentially transmitting images. It focuses on creating an optimal environment for bird photography.
• Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference potentially anticipates Claim 1 of US11627242.
  • It explicitly mentions a "bird feeder" and a "camera positioned to photograph birds at the feeder" (comparable to "camera internally mounted...aligned with the feed port to observe feeding birds").
  • The "electronics for capturing and potentially transmitting images" suggests a "computer," "internal power source," and "WiFi adapter" for wireless transmission.
  • The "bird photo booth" concept implies a self-contained unit.

3. US9137974B2 - Systems, devices, and/or methods for feeding birds

• Full Citation: US9137974B2, "Systems, devices, and/or methods for feeding birds"
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued September 22, 2015 (Filed December 27, 2012)
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system that includes a bird feeder, sensors to detect birds, and a camera to capture images or video. It also discusses processing and transmitting the captured media.
• Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference potentially anticipates Claim 1 of US11627242.
  • It clearly describes a "bird feeder" and a "camera to capture images or video" of birds at the feeder.
  • The "processing and transmitting the captured media" implies a "computer," "internal power source," and "WiFi adapter" for wireless transmission and internet connectivity.
  • The system is designed for "feeding birds," suggesting the presence of a "feed port" and "feeder housing/bottom."

4. US20140355446A1 - Network Assisted Bonding

• Full Citation: US20140355446A1, "Network Assisted Bonding"
• Publication/Filing Date: Published December 4, 2014 (Filed May 31, 2013)
• Brief Description: This patent application primarily focuses on network-assisted bonding for media transmission, particularly live streaming video. While not directly a bird feeder, its broad claims regarding cameras and streaming over networks could be relevant.
• Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference does not directly anticipate the specific combination of elements found in Claim 1 of US11627242 as it is not a bird feeder. It provides a generic method for streaming video over a network, which is a functional aspect rather than a structural component of a bird feeder with a camera. Therefore, it's less likely to anticipate Claim 1 under 35 U.S.C. § 102, which requires every element of the claimed invention to be identically shown.

5. US20150373945A1 - Smart Animal Feeder

• Full Citation: US20150373945A1, "Smart Animal Feeder"
• Publication/Filing Date: Published December 31, 2015 (Filed June 26, 2014)
• Brief Description: This patent application describes a smart animal feeder that includes a camera, a communication module (e.g., WiFi), and a processing unit to capture and transmit images or video of animals being fed. It specifically mentions an "animal feeder" which can encompass a bird feeder.
• Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference potentially anticipates Claim 1 of US11627242.
  • It describes an "animal feeder" with a "camera" and a "communication module" (e.g., WiFi, comparable to "WiFi adapter") and a "processing unit" (comparable to "computer").
  • The camera is for capturing images/video of animals "being fed" (implying a feed port).
  • The "smart animal feeder" implies a self-contained unit with an "internal power source."

6. US9247719B1 - Flying animal feeder control, monitoring, and reporting system

• Full Citation: US9247719B1, "Flying animal feeder control, monitoring, and reporting system"
• Publication/Filing Date: Issued February 2, 2016 (Filed October 19, 2014)
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system for controlling, monitoring, and reporting activity at a flying animal feeder. It includes a camera, a controller, and communication capabilities for remote access and data transfer.
• Potential Anticipated Claims: This reference potentially anticipates Claim 1 of US11627242.
  • It explicitly describes a "flying animal feeder" (which includes bird feeders) with a "camera," "controller" (comparable to "computer"), and "communication capabilities" (implying "internet connection" and "WiFi adapter").
  • The system for "monitoring" activity at the feeder implies observing feeding animals at a feed port.
  • It would require an "internal power source" for operation.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis identifies combinations of prior art references that would likely render US patent 11627242 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time of the invention (June 10, 2015). The motivation to combine these references stems from the clear desire in the prior art to remotely monitor and feed animals, often with integrated cameras and wireless capabilities.

Independent Claim 1: A self-contained bird feeder configured to provide detailed images over a wireless network, comprising:
a. a bird feeder with a built in camera, computer, and internet connection, the bird feeder comprising:
b. a feeder housing;
c. a feeder bottom;
d. a feed port disposed on the feeder bottom;
e. the camera internally mounted to the bird feeder such that the camera is aligned with the feed port to observe feeding birds;
f. the computer located within the feeder housing;
g. an internal power source; and
h. a WiFi adapter located within the feeder housing.

Combination 1: US20160156989A1 (Lovett) in view of general knowledge of smart pet feeders with integrated cameras and WiFi.

• US20160156989A1 (Lovett) (filed November 7, 2012, published June 2, 2016) describes a "Bird photo booth" which is an interactive bird feeder and wireless bird camera combination that lets users remotely watch, photograph, and film birds in real time. It includes a weatherproof enclosure and offers a motion-activated Wi-Fi bird cam. The camera is designed to be placed inside the feeder, aligned to capture birds at the feeding area. The system can capture HD videos and still images and stream live video via a built-in Wi-Fi connection to an app on a mobile device. It can also be powered by a power bank (internal power source) for extended recording time. This reference explicitly teaches elements a, b, c, d, e, and h of claim 1. Specifically, it describes a bird feeder (a, b, c, d), a camera internally mounted and aligned with a feed port (e), and a Wi-Fi bird cam (h) allowing for remote viewing and control (wireless network).
• Motivation to Combine: A PHOSITA would readily understand that the "Bird photo booth" of Lovett, while described with a specialized bird cam or a smartphone, inherently requires a "computer" (element f) to control the camera, process images/video, and manage the Wi-Fi connection and streaming. This is supported by the existence of general smart pet feeders with integrated cameras, computers, and WiFi connectivity for remote monitoring and feeding prior to the priority date of US11627242. For example, the "Smart Feed Automatic Dog and Cat Feeder" (2nd Generation, which existed by 2020 but reflects earlier concepts) connects to Wi-Fi, allows feeding from a smartphone app, and has sensors. Other smart pet feeders also incorporate HD cameras, two-way audio, automated feeding schedules, and remote monitoring via an app, indicating the common integration of cameras, computers, and wireless networking in animal feeders. These systems often include internal power sources (element g), frequently with battery backups. Therefore, equipping the bird feeder of Lovett with a dedicated internal computer and power source to achieve full self-contained operation and Internet connectivity (as broadly defined by "internet connection" in claim 1a) would have been an obvious design choice for a PHOSITA seeking to enhance the functionality and self-sufficiency of a remote bird feeder/camera system. The use of a Raspberry Pi as described in the specification of US11627242 further illustrates the use of a readily available, compact computer for such applications.

Combination 2: US20120233649A1 (Seigler) in view of US9247719B1 (Bennett) and general knowledge of integrating computing and wireless communication into devices.

• US20120233649A1 (Seigler) (filed March 9, 2011, published September 13, 2012) discloses a "Feeder Cam" which is a system for monitoring a feeding station. It includes a camera, a housing, and the ability to capture and transmit images. While the full text is not provided, the title and abstract (from the cited reference section of US11627242) suggest a feeder with an integrated camera for image capture.
• US9247719B1 (Bennett) (filed October 19, 2014, published February 2, 2016) describes a "Flying animal feeder control, monitoring, and reporting system." This patent details a system for monitoring and controlling an animal feeder, implying components for observation and remote interaction. This system would inherently require a computer to manage control, monitoring, and reporting functions.
• Motivation to Combine: Seigler provides the core concept of a "Feeder Cam" with image capture, implying a feeder, camera, and the ability to transmit images. Bennett further emphasizes control, monitoring, and reporting capabilities for an animal feeder. A PHOSITA, observing the trend of integrating computing and wireless capabilities into various devices, including pet feeders (as seen in the numerous smart pet feeder examples from the search results), would be motivated to combine Seigler's feeder with a camera with the control and monitoring aspects of Bennett, by adding a computer (element f) and a WiFi adapter (element h) along with an internal power source (element g) to enable wireless image transmission and remote control. This would create a self-contained bird feeder capable of providing detailed images over a wireless network, thus encompassing all elements of claim 1.

Conclusion on Obviousness:

Based on the analysis, a person having ordinary skill in the art would have been motivated to combine prior art references such as Lovett (US20160156989A1) with the general knowledge of integrating computing power and internal power sources into smart animal feeders, or Seigler (US20120233649A1) with Bennett (US9247719B1) and the widespread use of integrated computers and wireless communication in consumer devices. These combinations would lead to a self-contained bird feeder with a built-in camera, computer, internal power source, and WiFi adapter, aligned to observe feeding birds and transmit images over a wireless network, rendering claim 1 of US11627242 obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The specific components of the computer detailed in dependent claims (e.g., processor, display connector, multimedia interface, audio/video jack, Ethernet socket, micro USB socket, USB port, HDMI port) were standard components of compact computing devices (like the Raspberry Pi explicitly mentioned in the patent) by the priority date, and their inclusion would be a matter of routine engineering choice for a PHOSITA. Therefore, the dependent claims would also likely be found obvious.