Invalidity dossier

US 5594432

Added 9/23/2026, 11:13:58 AM

At a glanceNo PTAB challengesNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.

✓ Generated

Patent Overview: US 5,594,432 A

Title: Traffic information warning system
Patent number: US 5,594,432 A
Inventors: David C. Oliva; Max W. Rogers
Original/current assignee: Cobra Electronics Corp (Cobra Electronics Corporation)
Priority date: 1994-08-30 (claimed from US 08/297,969, which issued as US 5,497,148 A)
Filing date: 1995-11-29 (application US 08/564,468)
Publication/grant date: 1997-01-14
Legal status (as listed): Expired – Lifetime; anticipated expiration 2014-08-30
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5594432/en

Purpose: To warn or otherwise advise motorists of traffic hazards and conditions in their operating vicinity. The advisory site may be an emergency vehicle or a roadside hazard.

Plain-language scope: The system has a transmitter at the advisory site and a receiver in the vehicle. The transmitter uses a first oscillator (first carrier frequency S₁) and a second oscillator (second carrier frequency S₂) spaced apart by a predetermined frequency difference—preferably 80 MHz, e.g., 24.11 GHz and 24.19 GHz. A modulator modulates both carriers with an identical modulating signal M reflecting the traffic situation. The receiver uses scanning circuitry, such as a programmed microprocessor, to scan a frequency range and detect carriers separated by that predetermined difference (optionally by constant sweep rate and timing the two detections). A demodulator retrieves modulating signals M₁ and M₂; the receiver compares them and, if identical, announces a message based on them, preferably via a look-up table in microprocessor memory. Alternative embodiments compare M₁, or then M₂, against acceptable stored messages. Announcement may be visual (e.g., LCD), audible (tones, or a stored voice-synthesized message), or both.

What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the full claims, complete description, or all drawing details (FIGS. 1–6 are referenced but not fully reproduced). It does not establish the accuracy of the legal status, assignee list, priority date, or the security-agreement/reassignment events, which Google Patents expressly characterizes as assumptions or unverified. It also does not establish validity, enforceability, infringement, or the content of any prior art. No litigation or ownership analysis is included here.

Generated 10/1/2026, 9:54:00 PM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5594432. 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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.