Invalidity dossier
US 6312115
Added 9/21/2026, 9:38:19 AM
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 6,312,115 B1
Title: Ink cartridge for ink jet recorder and method of manufacturing same
Patent number: US 6,312,115 B1
Application number: US 09/041,890
Assignee: Seiko Epson Corporation (original and current assignee; assignment recorded 1998-06-19)
Inventors: Kazuhiko Hara, Minoru Usui, Kouichi Toba, Takao Kobayashi
Priority date: 1997-03-12
Filing date: 1998-03-12
Grant/publication date: 2001-11-06
Legal status: Expired – Lifetime; anticipated expiration 2018-03-12
Purpose and plain-language scope (from the supplied text):
The patent concerns an ink cartridge for an ink jet recorder, plus a method of making that cartridge. The classification data places it in ink jet printing (B41J2/01) and, more specifically, in ink handling and ink supply systems (B41J2/17, B41J2/175), including ink cartridges (B41J2/17503), cartridge manufacturing (B41J2/17559), refilling (B41J2/17506), inner structure (B41J2/17513), and mounting within the printer (B41J2/1752).
Beyond that, the supplied excerpt does not establish the actual technical content of the disclosure. It lists prior-art keywords — ink, cartridge, tank body, supply port, port — indicating the description involves a cartridge tank body with an ink supply port, but it provides no claim language, abstract, or detailed description. Therefore no statement can be made here about the specific structural features, the manufacturing steps, or the precise scope of the claims.
Related continuations/priorities noted in the excerpt: later applications claiming priority to this patent include US 09/924,312 (issued as US 6,854,834 B2), US 10/879,652 (issued as US 6,929,359 B2), and US 10/899,640 (issued as US 7,086,723 B2). The excerpt does not explain their relationship to the present claims.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US6312115/en
What the excerpt does not establish: the claims, abstract, detailed embodiments, drawings, cited prior art references, or any legal conclusions regarding validity or enforceability.
Generated 10/1/2026, 10:01:57 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6312115. 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.