Invalidity dossier
US 6293901
Magnetically suspended fluid pump and control system
Current assignee: Vascor Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 2:19:06 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 6,293,901 B1
Title: Magnetically suspended fluid pump and control system
Patent number: US 6,293,901 B1
Inventor: Edward K. Prem
Original/current assignee (as listed): Vascor Inc
Application number: US 09/307,116
Filing date: 1999-05-07
Publication/grant date: 2001-09-25
Earliest priority date (assumed): 1997-11-26, from US 08/978,670 (patent/US5928131A)
Status: Expired – Fee Related; anticipated expiration 2017-11-26
Purpose and plain-language scope. The supplied text identifies this as a magnetically suspended fluid pump and control system. The classification data place it as a non-positive-displacement (rotodynamic) blood pump with a rotating impeller acting on blood, including centrifugal and axial-flow variants, and as an implantable ventricular assist device drawing blood from a ventricle and returning it to the arterial system via a cannula external to the ventricle. Other classifications cover electromagnetic drive of the blood-contacting member (e.g., canned motor pumps), electronic/feedback control, and regulation using real-time patient data such as blood-flow transducer signals. The "prior art keywords" listed are stator, rotor, permanent magnet, blood pump, and blood. In plain terms, the document concerns a pump in which the rotor is held and driven magnetically rather than by a mechanical shaft bearing, together with a control system for it.
Only the abstract-level and classification-level material above is available in this excerpt; no claims, written description, drawings, or embodiments were supplied.
What the excerpt does not establish. It does not provide the claims or their scope, the specification, the number or content of figures, specific control algorithms or sensor details, or any measured performance. It also does not establish inventorship beyond the single listed inventor, the accuracy of the listed assignee or priority data (Google Patents states these are assumptions and not legal conclusions), or the legal status beyond the listed "Expired – Fee Related" entry, which is expressly an assumption and not a legal conclusion. No litigation, ownership-transfer, validity, or prior-art analysis is undertaken here, per scope limits.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:52:23 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6293901. 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.