Assignment history

Inventors

• Thomas Cona (Sitnet LLC)
• Patrick T. Igoe (Sitnet LLC)
• Leonid Kravets (Sitnet LLC)
• Edward A. Ehrlacher (Sitnet LLC)

Original assignee

Sitnet LLC is the original assignee. It is unclear if Sitnet LLC shipped a product embodying the claims based on the provided patent text. The patent text describes a "Method and system for using a situational network," which suggests a software or service-based product. Google Patents lists Sitnet LLC as the "Current Assignee" and states the legal status as "Active, expires 2027-12-04".

Assignment timeline

• 2024-04-19 (executed) / recorded 2024-04-19 — Reel 059952/0157

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: EHRLACHER, EDWARD A., KRAVETS, LEONID, IGOE, PATRICK T., CONA, THOMAS
  • Assignee: RESOURCE CONSORTIUM LIMITED
  • Correspondent: BAEHR, DAVID, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID BAEHR
  • Context: Internal reorg (transfer from individual inventors to an entity)

• 2024-04-19 (executed) / recorded 2024-04-19 — Reel 059952/0158

  • Conveyance: Re-domestication and Entity Conversion
  • Assignor: RESOURCE CONSORTIUM LIMITED
  • Assignee: RESOURCE CONSORTIUM LIMITED, LLC
  • Correspondent: BAEHR, DAVID, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID BAEHR. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Internal reorg (entity conversion)

• 2024-04-19 (executed) / recorded 2024-04-19 — Reel 059952/0159

  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: RESOURCE CONSORTIUM LIMITED, LLC
  • Assignee: SitNet LLC
  • Correspondent: BAEHR, DAVID, LAW OFFICE OF DAVID BAEHR. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Internal reorg (transfer to current assignee)

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 12238815
    2007 : Priority date
    2024 : Filed by Sitnet LLC
         : Assigned to Resource Consortium Limited
         : Assigned to Resource Consortium Limited LLC
         : Assigned to SitNet LLC
    2025 : Issued
    2026 : PTAB case IPR2026-00111 filed
         : US case filed in New York Southern District Court

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — unclear. While the assignee names (RESOURCE CONSORTIUM LIMITED, RESOURCE CONSORTIUM LIMITED, LLC, SitNet LLC) could suggest shell entities, the provided information does not definitively confirm this through details like registered-agent addresses or explicit statements about product commerce.

2. Known asserter in the chain — present. Google Patents indicates "PTAB case IPR2026-00111 filed (Pending)" and "US case filed in New York Southern District Court" for this patent, and lists "Unified Patents" as a petitioner in the PTAB case and "District Court" as the source for the New York case. Unified Patents is a known defensive aggregator and actively tracks NPE assertions. The fact that they are challenging this patent in an IPR suggests it is being asserted or is likely to be asserted by an NPE.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. David Baehr of Law Office of David Baehr is listed as the correspondent for all three recorded assignments on 2024-04-19 (Reel 059952/0157, 059952/0158, and 059952/0159).

4. Cascading transfers — present. All three assignments from the inventors to Resource Consortium Limited, then to Resource Consortium Limited, LLC, and finally to SitNet LLC, were executed and recorded on the same day, 2024-04-19 (Reel 059952/0157, 059952/0158, 059952/0159). This rapid sequence of transfers to different entities, all handled by the same correspondent, is a strong signal.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — present. The patent was granted on 2025-02-25. Litigation began with a US case filed in New York Southern District Court, and a PTAB case IPR2026-00111 filed. While the exact filing date of the district court case is not precisely specified in relation to the assignment dates, the assignment chain was completed in April 2024, nearly a year before the patent was granted in February 2025, and well before the known litigation began in 2026. The rapid chain of assignments occurring before issuance and before recorded litigation indicates preparation for assertion.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. There is no indication in the provided information of the original assignee filing for bankruptcy.

7. Privateering — unclear. There is no information provided to suggest an operating company transferred the patent to an NPE for assertion on its behalf.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. While Unified Patents is involved in challenging the patent, the chain does not end with a defensive aggregator as an assignee.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. The presence of cascading transfers (Reel 059952/0157, 059952/0158, 059952/0159, all on 2024-04-19), a repeat correspondent (David Baehr on all 2024-04-19 assignments), and pre-litigation transfers (assignments completed in April 2024, well before the patent issued in Feb 2025 and litigation in 2026) are strong indicators. Furthermore, the involvement of Unified Patents in challenging the patent suggests it is being asserted by an NPE.

View assignment records on USPTO Assignment Center