Patent 6795805

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged through Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review at the USPTO. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs.

Cases on file (1)

Group view →

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6795805. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

✓ Generated

The Google Patents page for US6795805 lists several litigation cases in various US District Courts. I will extract this information directly from the provided patent text, as it explicitly states: "Family has litigation" and then lists cases. I will consolidate these and present them.

Here's the plan based on the provided patent text:

  1. Go through the "Family has litigation" section of the US6795805B1 Google Patents page.
  2. For each listed case, extract:
    • Plaintiff (will need to infer or look up if not explicitly stated, but often the patent owner is the plaintiff in infringement cases listed this way)
    • Defendant (will need to infer or look up if not explicitly stated)
    • Jurisdiction (explicitly given as District Court)
    • Case number
    • Filing date (not explicitly given in the quick links, will look for this in more detail if possible, otherwise will state it's not available)
    • Outcome or current status (will look for this)

Let's list the cases directly from the provided text under "Family has litigation".

Unified Patents Litigation Data (Source: District Court, Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court)

  • Case: 2:18-cv-00344
  • Case: 2:16-cv-00082
  • Case: 2:19-cv-00057
  • Case: 2:15-cv-00349
  • Case: 2:14-cv-01055
  • Case: 2:18-cv-00346
  • Case: 2:18-cv-00343
  • Case: 2:14-cv-00293
  • Case: 2:15-cv-01510
  • Case: 2:19-cv-00027
  • Case: 2:15-cv-00919
  • Case: 2:15-cv-00350
  • Case: 2:15-cv-00351

Unified Patents Litigation Data (Source: District Court, Jurisdiction: Texas Northern District Court)

  • Case: 3:19-cv-00385

Unified Patents Litigation Data (Source: District Court, Jurisdiction: California Central District Court)

  • Case: 8:15-cv-00378

Unified Patents Litigation Data (Source: District Court, Jurisdiction: New York Southern District Court)

  • Case: 1:19-cv-07397

The Google Patents information provides case numbers and jurisdictions but does not explicitly state plaintiffs, defendants, filing dates, or outcomes for each individual case link. It only mentions "US case filed in...". The current assignee of the patent is Saint Lawrence Communications LLC, so it's highly probable that Saint Lawrence Communications LLC or one of its related entities (e.g., Acacia Research Group LLC, which is also mentioned in reassignments) is the plaintiff in these cases. Unified Patents typically challenges patents or assists defendants, as described in search results about Unified Patents.

Given the prompt's instruction "If you do not know something with high confidence, say so explicitly rather than fabricating," and the lack of explicit plaintiff/defendant/filing date/outcome in the snippets from the Google Patents page, I will state what is available and acknowledge the missing information.

I will formulate the response by listing each case found, with the available details. I will also make a general statement about the likely plaintiff based on the current assignee.

One of the search results is for "Unified Patents Portal", which allows searching for patent litigations in District Courts. I will explicitly state that I am using the information from the provided patent text, which is directly linked from Google Patents, as it provides a direct list of related litigation.

The Google Patents page also mentions "First worldwide family litigation filed", with a link to Darts-ip. This indicates broader litigation beyond just the US cases. However, the request specifically asked for "US patent 6795805" and to search "sites that cover patent litigation, like: https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/litigation/caselist." The provided details in the Google Patent page itself already give specific US cases. I will focus on the US cases as per the instructions.

I need to be careful to extract only the information for patent 6795805, and not confuse it with other patents mentioned in the search results (like IPR2021-01260 for Patent No. 9,292,852 or IPR2021-01413 for MemoryWeb's U.S. Patent No. 10,621,228, which were returned in the general search about Unified Patents but are not related to US6795805).

The litigation information provided directly on the Google Patents page for US6795805 is the most direct and reliable source for this specific patent within the given constraints. It doesn't give filing dates or outcomes directly in the snippets, only "US case filed in...". I will use the available information.As a patent attorney, I have reviewed the litigation data related to US patent 6795805, "Periodicity enhancement in decoding wideband signals," as of April 26, 2026.

Based on the information available from Google Patents, which cites Unified Patents Litigation Data and District Court records, the following cases are known to involve US patent 6795805:

Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court

  • Case Number: 2:18-cv-00344
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet. Given that Saint Lawrence Communications LLC is the current assignee, it is highly probable they were a plaintiff or a related entity.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.
  • Case Number: 2:16-cv-00082
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:19-cv-00057
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:15-cv-00349
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:14-cv-01055
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:18-cv-00346
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:18-cv-00343
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:14-cv-00293
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:15-cv-01510
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:19-cv-00027
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:15-cv-00919
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:15-cv-00350
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.
  • Case Number: 2:15-cv-00351
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.

Jurisdiction: Texas Northern District Court

  • Case Number: 3:19-cv-00385
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.

Jurisdiction: California Central District Court

  • Case Number: 8:15-cv-00378
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.

Jurisdiction: New York Southern District Court

  • Case Number: 1:19-cv-07397
    • Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated.
    • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.
    • Outcome/Current Status: Not explicitly stated.

While the Google Patents information confirms the existence of these cases and their respective jurisdictions and case numbers, it does not provide explicit details regarding the plaintiff(s), defendant(s), filing dates, or the ultimate outcomes or current status for each individual listed case. The patent's current assignee, Saint Lawrence Communications LLC, is the most likely plaintiff in these infringement actions.

Generated 5/29/2026, 6:00:04 PM