Invalidity dossier
US 5971559
Surface light source device
Current assignee: Enplas Corp
Added 9/23/2026, 5:35:53 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 5,971,559 A
Title: Surface light source device
Assignee: Enplas Corp (original and current assignee as listed)
Inventor(s): Tsuyoshi Ishikawa; Kayoko Watai; Kazuaki Yokoyama
Application No.: US 09/084,008 | Filed: 1998-05-26
Published/Granted: 1999-10-26
Priority date (as listed): 1994-08-12
Anticipated expiration: 2014-08-12 | Status: Expired – Fee Related
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5971559/en
Purpose and plain-language scope (per the excerpt): The patent concerns a surface light source device that uses a light conducting member. As described, the device includes a light conducting member (11); a linear light source (12) near one edge surface (11a, the light incident surface); a diffusion plate (13) on or adjacent the light emitting surface (11b); and a reflective surface (14) on or adjacent the opposite side surface (11c). Light enters the incident surface, travels within the conducting member toward the opposite edge, and is emitted from the light emitting surface; the emitted light passes through the diffusion plate to provide a diffused surface light. To improve light-emitting efficiency and obtain a uniform brightness distribution on the diffusion plate, a pattern of fine diffusing portions (20) is formed on the opposite side surface (11c), e.g., by printing with a light-diffusing paint material. The excerpt notes such devices are used, for example, as a backlight for a liquid crystal display.
What the excerpt does not establish:
- The full text of the claims, and therefore the precise legal scope of coverage.
- The complete specification, drawings, or all described embodiments.
- The specific prior-art references cited or relied upon during examination.
- Any litigation, ownership transfers, or validity determinations (also excluded by instruction).
- Whether the listed dates, assignee, and legal status are accurate, as the source itself characterizes these as assumptions or non-legal conclusions.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:43:28 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5971559. 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.