US 12079667

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 12079667:

Title: Virtual systems management

Assignee: TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. (Original Assignee). Reassigned to WYE IP CAPITAL LLC on 2025-09-29.

Inventor: Vipul Pabari

Filing Date: 2023-04-14

Issue Date: 2024-09-03

Abstract: The patent describes an apparatus and method for automatic configuration management of a network. It focuses on a virtualization system with an inventory of physical resources and virtual assets, where virtual assets are software instantiations of computer systems. The system receives a request for virtual asset provisioning with specific parameters and data on available inventory. It then automatically provisions a virtual asset to a physical resource that matches the request's parameters, assigns this provisioned asset to the request, and grants user access.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1 (Method): This claim describes a method for automatically managing a network virtualization environment. It involves:

  1. Maintaining an inventory of physical resources and virtual assets managed by a virtualization layer running on those physical resources. Virtual assets are software representations of computer systems.
  2. Receiving a request to provision a virtual asset, which includes specific parameters (e.g., CPU, memory, storage, network configuration).
  3. Receiving data about the current inventory available in the virtualization system.
  4. Automatically provisioning a virtual asset to a specific physical resource within the system that aligns with the parameters in the provisioning request.
  5. Assigning the newly provisioned virtual asset to fulfill the request.
  6. Providing user access to this provisioned virtual asset.
  7. Performing these actions without regard to the specific processor (CPU), operating system (OS), virtualization platform, or application software of the virtualization environment.

• Independent Claim 15 (System): This claim defines a system for automatically managing a network virtualization environment. The system includes:

  1. A control center application.
  2. A virtual mapping engine within the control center application configured to discover and inventory physical resources and virtual assets in the network.
  3. A provisioning manager within the control center application configured to automatically provision virtual assets to physical resources based on provisioning requests and available inventory.
  4. This system is characterized by being able to provision virtual assets regardless of the underlying processor (CPU), operating system (OS), or virtualization platform software of the virtualization environment.

• Independent Claim 23 (Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Medium): This claim covers a non-transitory computer-readable medium (e.g., a hard drive, solid-state drive) storing instructions that, when executed by a processor, perform the method outlined in Claim 1. This means the computer program itself, when stored on a suitable medium, is claimed.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
A direct match for US12079667 in CAFC 2026 dockets was not found in the search results. However, the patent's metadata indicates that "Family has litigation" with a "PTAB case IPR2026-00297 filed (Pending)" and a "US case filed in Texas Eastern District Court (2:25-cv-00943)".

US patent 12079667 is involved in known litigation. The details of these cases, as of April 26, 2026, are as follows:

1. PTAB Case: IPR2026-00297

   • Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents (Petitioner)
   • Defendant(s): TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. (Patent Owner/Respondent)
   • Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
   • Case Number: IPR2026-00297
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the patent document snippet, but the status indicates it was filed.
   • Outcome or Current Status: Pending

2. US District Court Case: Texas Eastern District Court

   • Plaintiff(s): Likely TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. (current assignee)
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the patent document.
   • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
   • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00943
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly provided in the patent document snippet, but the case number indicates it was filed in 2025.
   • Outcome or Current Status: Litigation

3. First Worldwide Family Litigation

   • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the patent document.
   • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the patent document.
   • Jurisdiction: Not explicitly stated, noted as "First worldwide family litigation filed".
   • Case Number: Not explicitly stated in the patent document.
   • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the patent document.
   • Outcome or Current Status: Litigation

Proceedings overview

Currently, there is one active AIA trial proceeding on US patent 12079667: IPR2026-00297, which is in a pending status. This means the patent's claims are currently undergoing review by the PTAB, and no final decision on their validity has been issued yet. The bottom-line defensive posture for a defendant is that the patent's claims are actively being challenged, and the outcome of this IPR could significantly impact future assertion strategies.

IPR2026-00297 — Microsoft Corporation v. Vipul Pabari (Patent Owner of Record in this IPR)

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-03-07
• Status: Pending. The proceeding is ongoing before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
• Judge panel: Information on the specific judge panel is not yet publicly available in the provided data.
• Petition grounds: Details regarding the specific claims challenged, the prior art cited, and the statutory bases (§ 102 for anticipation, § 103 for obviousness, or § 112 for indefiniteness/written description/enablement) are not available in the provided data and would typically be found in the filed petition, which is not included here.
• Institution decision: The institution decision has not yet been issued, as the case is pending. The deadline for the institution decision is typically six months from the filing of the preliminary response, or three months from the filing of a patent owner response if one is filed after a preliminary response. Given the filing date of 2026-03-07, the institution decision is still anticipated.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable; a Final Written Decision has not been issued as the proceeding is pending.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable; the proceeding is pending.
• Appeal: Not applicable; there has been no Final Written Decision to appeal.
• Defensive value: This active IPR means that the validity of the patent's claims is under scrutiny. A defendant facing assertion could benefit if claims are ultimately invalidated. However, if institution is denied or claims are sustained, it could strengthen the patent owner's position against future challenges.

Strategic summary

Currently, the validity of claims in US12079667 is being challenged in IPR2026-00297. As of today, 2026-05-29, this proceeding is still pending, and no institution decision or Final Written Decision (FWD) has been issued. Therefore, all claims of US12079667 are currently UNTESTED by a final PTAB decision. The patent's original assignee was TOUTVIRTUAL Inc., and it was reassigned to WYE IP CAPITAL LLC on 2025-09-29. The "PTAB proceedings on file" section states "petitioner: Microsoft Corporation" and "inventor: Vipul Pabari" in the context of the IPR party, which is an unusual listing for a patent owner in an IPR and differs from the listed assignee. However, based on the provided canonical data, Microsoft Corporation is the petitioner.

Since there is no FWD, the estoppel landscape under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) is not yet relevant. Once an FWD is issued, the petitioner (Microsoft Corporation, and any parties in privity with them) would be barred from asserting in future civil actions or other USPTO proceedings any invalidity ground that they raised or reasonably could have raised in the IPR against the claims that were found patentable. This initial IPR is a critical event for the patent, as its outcome will either harden or weaken the patent for future assertions.

The presence of Unified Patents in the Google Patents metadata as a petitioner for IPR2026-00297, while the "PTAB proceedings on file" lists Microsoft Corporation, suggests a potential discrepancy. Unified Patents is known as a defensive aggregator that often files IPRs on behalf of its members to deter patent assertion, and Microsoft is a large operating company that may also initiate IPRs directly. For this analysis, we are strictly adhering to the "PTAB proceedings on file" which lists Microsoft Corporation as the petitioner.

Recommended next steps

• Monitor IPR2026-00297 closely: As a defendant, it is critical to track the progress of IPR2026-00297. The next significant milestone will be the Institution Decision, which is expected within the statutory timeframe (typically six months from the filing of the preliminary response). If the PTAB decides to institute the IPR, it means they found a reasonable likelihood that at least one challenged claim is unpatentable, which would be a positive development for a defendant.
• Review Petition and Patent Owner Response (if publicly available): If the IPR proceeds to institution, obtaining and reviewing the petition filed by Microsoft Corporation and any Patent Owner Response will be crucial. These documents will detail the specific claims challenged, the prior art presented, and the arguments made by both sides.
• Assess Impact of Institution Decision: If claims are instituted, a defendant should evaluate whether the grounds of unpatentability raised align with their own potential invalidity defenses. If the IPR is not instituted, it signals that the PTAB found the petition unconvincing, which may suggest higher hurdles for future IPRs on similar grounds.
• Anticipate FWD: If the IPR is instituted, the Final Written Decision is typically due within one year of institution. This decision will provide the definitive PTAB ruling on the patentability of the challenged claims.

Inventors

The named inventor is Vipul Pabari. The patent does not explicitly state his employer at the time of filing, but it is typically the original assignee, TOUTVIRTUAL Inc.

Original assignee

The original assignee named on the issued patent is TOUTVIRTUAL Inc.

The patent describes an apparatus and method for "Virtual systems management," including a "Control Center application" and "Control Center software" for managing virtual environments. This suggests their primary line of business was in developing and providing software for virtual systems management. While the patent details the architecture and functionality of such a system, it does not explicitly state that TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. shipped a specific product embodying the claims.

Based on the patent's legal status information, TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. was the Patent Owner/Respondent in the PTAB case IPR2026-00297, indicating it was an active entity holding the patent as of the IPR filing. However, a Patent Security Agreement was executed on 2025-09-29, assigning a security interest to WYE IP CAPITAL LLC, which could indicate a change in financial control or intent to monetize. The current operating status beyond these events is not explicitly detailed in the provided information.

Assignment timeline

The USPTO Patent Assignment Search did not return specific reel/frame or correspondent details in the provided search snippets. Therefore, the following timeline is based on the "Legal events" section from Google Patents, which does not include recording dates, reel/frame numbers, or correspondent information.

• 2023-04-14 (executed) / recorded N/A — Reel N/A
  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignor's Interest
  • Assignor: PABARI, VIPUL
  • Assignee: TOUTVIRTUAL Inc.
  • Correspondent: N/A
  • Context: Inventor assigns intellectual property to the original assignee.
• 2025-09-29 (executed) / recorded N/A — Reel N/A
  • Conveyance: Patent Security Agreement
  • Assignor: TOUTVIRTUAL Inc.
  • Assignee: WYE IP CAPITAL LLC
  • Correspondent: N/A
  • Context: Patent asset used as collateral or transferred for a security interest.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 12079667
    2023 : Filed by Toutvirtual Inc
         : Inventor assigned to Toutvirtual
    2024 : Issued
    2025 : Security Agmt to WYE IP CAPITAL LLC
    2026 : IPR filed

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — unclear. While "WYE IP CAPITAL LLC" has a name pattern that could suggest a shell entity, without information on its address (e.g., registered-agent service) or whether it has products in commerce, it is not possible to definitively confirm it as a shell entity.
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present. Neither TOUTVIRTUAL Inc. nor WYE IP CAPITAL LLC are listed among the commonly cited NPEs. Unified Patents is a petitioner in the IPR case against the patent owner, not an assignee in the chain.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — not present due to lack of information. The source material does not provide correspondent names or firms for the recorded assignments.
4. Cascading transfers — not present. Only two transfers are noted: one from the inventor to the original assignee, and one security agreement. This does not constitute multiple consecutive assignments through chained LLCs.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — present. A US case (2:25-cv-00943) was filed in the Texas Eastern District Court in 2025. The Patent Security Agreement with WYE IP CAPITAL LLC was executed on 2025-09-29. This close proximity (within the same year) between the execution of the security agreement and the filing of the litigation suggests the transfer may have been arranged to facilitate or finance assertion.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. No indication of bankruptcy proceedings for the assignor.
7. Privateering — not present. There is no information to suggest an operating company transferred the patent to an NPE for assertion against competitors on its behalf.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. Although Unified Patents (a defensive aggregator) is involved, they are challenging the patent through an IPR, not acquiring it for defensive purposes.

Verdict

NPE — moderate confidence

This verdict is primarily driven by the "Pre-litigation transfer" signal. The execution of a Patent Security Agreement to WYE IP CAPITAL LLC on 2025-09-29, followed by or concurrent with a district court case filing in 2025 (case number 2:25-cv-00943), strongly suggests a transfer aimed at litigation or patent monetization. The generic name "WYE IP CAPITAL LLC" also hints at a potential licensing-focused entity, although definitive proof of a shell entity is lacking due to insufficient correspondent and address details.

To verify, search the USPTO Assignment Center for patent 12079667: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 12079667, I need to access the USPTO database for the patent and review its cited references. However, direct access to the full USPTO database and detailed examination of individual patent citations (including their descriptions and specific claims they anticipate) is beyond my current capabilities as an AI model. While I can confirm the existence of the patent and general information about prior art citation, I cannot perform a deep, claim-by-claim analysis of the cited references against US12079667 to determine anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Therefore, I cannot provide a list of the most relevant prior art with full citations, publication/filing dates, brief descriptions, and the specific claims they potentially anticipate, as this requires direct access to and interpretation of the cited patent documents.

Obviousness Analysis under 35 U.S.C. § 103 for US12079667

1. Scope and Content of the Prior Art (as described in US12079667)

The patent US12079667 itself provides a detailed "Description of the Related Art" which serves as the primary source of prior art for this analysis. This section highlights the state of IT management and virtualization prior to the invention's priority date (August 15, 2005). Key aspects of the disclosed prior art include:

• Conventional IT Management: IT management tasks are characterized by managing present-day operations and forecasting future capacity. Existing systems generally adhere to the International Telecommunications Union (ITU) standard for Element Management Systems (EMS), encompassing FCAPS (Fault, Configuration, Accounting, Performance, and Security) functionalities.
• Element-Driven Systems: The conventional methodology created an "element-driven management system" focused on optimizing individual elements. These systems typically "roll-up element-level metrics into higher level metrics through data correlation techniques" to provide aggregated summary views.
• Capacity Planning: Traditionally, capacity planning for day-to-day operations and new application rollouts is "typically carried out with a bottom-up data aggregation and with the use of forecasting methods such as trending, simulation, and custom analytics." This planning is performed at the "individual device level," often leading to under-utilized IT resources due to "worst-case capacity planning."
• Resource Categories: IT resources are classified into client, server, network, and storage. Server resource capacity planning typically involves "stress-testing the application with a certain predetermined workload and a set, acceptable application response time" to define hardware specifications.
• Virtualization Tools Limitations (Explicit Problem Statement): The emergence of resource virtualization, Web services, and service-oriented architectures (SOAs) increased the complexity of management. The patent explicitly states that "management of virtual assets can be achieved conventionally with virtualization software tools, but such techniques are typically labor intensive and require manual selection and implementation of configurations and utilize relatively cumbersome configuration change management." Crucially, it notes that "Many tools to assist in the management of virtualization environments are proprietary and work only with virtual environments from particular vendors." Furthermore, "some virtualization tools might only work with specific central processor units (CPUs)... or might only work with specific operating systems or virtualization platforms." This necessitates "multiple tools on hand for the various platforms and vendors" and specialized skill sets, making the existing approach "inefficient."

2. Differences Between the Claimed Invention and the Prior Art

The core innovation claimed by US12079667 is the ability to automatically manage one or more virtual environments "regardless of any underlying central processing unit (CPU) specification and regardless of any underlying operating system (OS) or virtualization environment." This platform-independence and automation are the central distinguishing features over the prior art described in the patent.

• Independent Claim 1 (Method): This claim describes a method for automatic management, including maintaining an inventory, receiving provisioning requests with parameters, automatically provisioning virtual assets to physical resources matching parameters, assigning the provisioned asset, and providing user access. The critical limitation is that these actions are performed "without regard to the specific processor (CPU), operating system (OS), virtualization platform, or application software of the virtualization environment."
• Independent Claim 15 (System): This claim defines a system with a Control Center application, a virtual mapping engine (for discovery and inventory), and a provisioning manager (for automatic provisioning). Like the method claim, the system is characterized by its ability to provision virtual assets "regardless of the underlying processor (CPU), operating system (OS), or virtualization platform software of the virtualization environment."
• Independent Claim 23 (Non-Transitory Computer-Readable Medium): This claim covers a computer-readable medium storing instructions for performing the method of Claim 1, thus inheriting the same distinguishing features.

The patent describes its solution as a "Control Center application" with modular components (Asset Manager, Provisioning Manager, Dynamic Application Router, Optimizer, Performance Manager, Capacity Planning Manager, and Virtual Mapping engine). To achieve platform independence, the system may employ a "Control Agent" on host machines, which acts as a "universal adapter" with a "Virtual Platform Abstraction Layer" and "multiple middleware adapters" to communicate with diverse virtualization environments (e.g., VMWare, Xen, Microsoft, IBM). This abstraction layer provides "common API access for the virtualization servers."

3. Level of Ordinary Skill in the Art (PHOSITA)

A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in 2005 would likely have a bachelor's degree in computer science or a related engineering field, coupled with several years of experience in network administration, system architecture, or software development pertaining to distributed systems, enterprise IT infrastructure, and virtualization technologies. This PHOSITA would be familiar with FCAPS models, client-server architectures, operating system principles, networking protocols, and the nascent but growing field of server and desktop virtualization, including the challenges of managing heterogeneous environments.

4. Obviousness Analysis and Motivation to Combine

Based on the patent's own description of the prior art, the independent claims of US12079667 would likely have been obvious to a PHOSITA in 2005. The patent clearly identifies the problems it solves, thereby providing a strong motivation to combine existing knowledge and adapt known techniques.

Combination of Prior Art References:

1. FCAPS-compliant Management Platforms + Existing Virtualization Software Tools: The prior art explicitly describes "FCAPS-compliant management platform[s]" that "provide complete visibility over operations" and "roll-up element-level metrics into higher level metrics through data correlation techniques." It also states that "management of virtual assets can be achieved conventionally with virtualization software tools." A PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine these two known technologies to manage the newly emerging virtual assets within a comprehensive IT management framework. Integrating virtualization management into an existing FCAPS-like platform would be a logical step to extend its capabilities from physical elements to virtual ones, addressing the growing complexity mentioned in the background.

2. Addressing Platform Dependency with an Abstraction Layer: The crucial inventive step claimed in US12079667 is managing virtual environments "regardless of any underlying central processing unit (CPU) specification and regardless of any underlying operating system (OS) or virtualization environment." The patent unequivocally identifies the problem that "Many tools to assist in the management of virtualization environments are proprietary and work only with virtual environments from particular vendors" and that they are tied to "specific central processor units (CPUs)... or... specific operating systems or virtualization platforms." This explicitly articulated "need" for a platform-independent solution provides clear motivation for a PHOSITA.

   The technical solution disclosed in the patent to achieve this platform independence is a "Control Agent" with a "Virtual Platform Abstraction Layer" and "multiple middleware adapters" to provide "common API access for the virtualization servers." The concept of using an abstraction layer or adapter to interface with diverse underlying systems (e.g., different hardware, operating systems, or software platforms) to achieve interoperability and hide complexity was a well-known and common software engineering principle by 2005. For example, database abstraction layers, hardware abstraction layers (HALs), and operating system abstraction layers were common patterns in software design. Given the explicit problem of proprietary and platform-specific virtualization tools, a PHOSITA would have been motivated to apply this known abstraction layer technique to create a "universal adapter" that could communicate with various virtualization platforms.

Reasoning for Obviousness:

• Identified Problem, Known Solution: The patent itself functions as an admission of prior art regarding the existence of element-based IT management and virtualization tools, alongside a clear articulation of the deficiencies of those tools, specifically their lack of interoperability across different platforms. The solution, an abstraction layer or adapter, is a known software design pattern for achieving platform independence.
• Predictable Result: Applying an abstraction layer to address the known problem of proprietary and platform-specific virtualization management tools would have been a predictable design choice. A PHOSITA, faced with the need to manage a heterogeneous virtualized environment, would naturally consider a modular approach that abstracts away vendor-specific details to provide a unified management interface.
• Motivation to Combine/Modify: The background section of the patent provides ample motivation for a PHOSITA to combine existing management frameworks with virtualization and to further modify them to be platform-agnostic. The inefficiency of "multiple tools" and "labor intensive" manual configuration would drive a PHOSITA towards an automated, unified, and platform-independent system. The "increasingly complex and unwieldy" management of virtual assets would incentivize the development of a "transparent" and "platform-independent" virtualization management system, as described in the invention's summary.

Therefore, a PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine the known capabilities of FCAPS-compliant management platforms with existing, albeit limited, virtualization tools, and further to implement an abstraction layer (such as the Control Agent with its Virtual Platform Abstraction Layer and middleware adapters described in the patent) to overcome the well-understood problem of platform-specific virtualization management, leading to the system and method claimed in US12079667.