Invalidity dossier
US 12324988
Multilayer framework architecture and user interface for video gaming applications
Current assignee: Cp Studios LLC
Added 9/23/2026, 2:00:25 PM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US 12324988 B2
Title: Multilayer framework architecture and user interface for video gaming applications
Patent number: US 12324988 B2
Application number: US 18/347,057
Publication of application: US 2025/0010200 A1 (2025-01-09)
Filing date: 2023-07-05
Grant/publication date: 2025-06-10
Priority date (stated as an assumption, not a legal conclusion): 2012-05-07
Adjusted expiration (per source): 2033-05-14; legal status listed as Active
Inventors: Brian Joseph Wiklem; Carrie Ann Cowan
Current and original assignee: CP Studios LLC (assignment records name Checkpoint Studios and assignors Cowan, Carrie Ann and Wiklem, Brian Joseph)
Purpose and plain-language scope (as far as the excerpt shows): The patent concerns a multilayer framework architecture and an associated user interface for video gaming applications. The source excerpt supplies the title, bibliographic data, and classification information but not the claims, abstract, or detailed description. On the face of the classification data, the subject matter is directed to video games (A63F13/00), controlling output signals based on game progress (A63F13/50), providing additional visual information to the game scene, such as an overlay to simulate a head-up display, using indicators such as showing the condition of a game character on screen (A63F13/53, A63F13/537), game server details and interconnection arrangements including special server arrangements such as regional servers or servers managing partitions of the game world (A63F13/30, A63F13/35, A63F13/352), and additional A63F13/60 subject matter partially shown. Prior-art keywords listed include player, game, user, gameplay, and video gaming.
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the claims, abstract, or written description, so the actual claimed scope, specific architectural layers, and user-interface features cannot be stated. It does not establish validity, enforceability, inventorship determinations, or the legal effect of the priority date. The source notes its legal-status and priority-date entries are assumptions and that assignee listings may be inaccurate.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:52:37 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 12324988. 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.