Invalidity dossier
US 5262391
Oxide superconductor and process for preparation thereof
Current assignee: Nippon Steel Corp
Added 9/23/2026, 8:49:43 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: US5262391A
Title: Oxide superconductor and process for preparation thereof
Patent number: US5262391A
Application number: US07/635,628
Inventor(s): Mitsuru Morita; Katsuyoshi Miyamoto; Kiyoshi Sawano; Shouichi Matsuda
Assignee: Nippon Steel Corporation (original and current assignee)
Priority date: 1989-05-02
Filing date: 1990-05-02
Publication/grant date: 1993-11-16
Legal status: Expired – Fee Related (anticipated expiration 2010-11-16 per the source listing)
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US5262391](/patent/US5262391)/en
Purpose
The patent addresses a problem in oxide superconductors of the RE-Ba-Cu-O type: materials made by the melting method may have a high critical current density but a single-crystal texture, making it very difficult to form long wire rods or large-area bulk materials by conventional metal-working methods such as wire drawing, rolling, and post heat treatment.
Plain-language scope
The disclosed oxide superconductor comprises oxides of RE (at least one rare earth element, including Y), Ba, and Cu. It has a texture in which the crystal directions of the 123 phase in the matrix are uniform, large-angle grain boundaries with an azimuth difference larger than 20° are absent, and the 211 phase is finely dispersed (or an aggregate thereof). The superconductor is formed into a plate or wire, with the c-axis of the crystal uniform within ±30° to the plate-face normal, or in the range of 60° to 120° to that normal.
The preparation process inserts a quenched, solidified, formed body containing RE, Ba, and Cu into a heating furnace and moves a grain-forming temperature region for the 123 phase—from 1050° to 910° C., with a temperature gradient of at least 2° C.—at a speed lower than 0.4 cm/hr from the top end of the formed body toward the rear.
What the excerpt does not establish
The excerpt is partial; it omits claims, detailed embodiments, drawings, and most of the description. It therefore does not establish the full claim scope, exact compositions, working examples, measured properties, or the complete legal status.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:08 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5262391. 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.