Patent 6795918
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.
Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash
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.
Current assignee: WETRO LAN LLC
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.
Proceedings overview
There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US patent 6795918 as of the most recent ingest from the USPTO ODP API. Web search for IPR, PGR, or CBM proceedings for US6795918 did not identify any additional filings. Therefore, all claims of US6795918 remain untested by AIA trial proceedings. This gives a defendant a neutral defensive posture with respect to PTAB challenges, meaning the patent has not been hardened by surviving IPRs, nor have any claims been invalidated through these specific proceedings.
Strategic summary
As no AIA trial proceedings have been identified for US patent 6795918, all 26 claims of the patent are currently UNTESTED in this forum. This means that a potential defendant has full flexibility to challenge any and all claims of the patent in an IPR, PGR, or CBM proceeding, provided they meet the statutory requirements for filing.
The estoppel landscape is entirely open. Since no proceedings have been initiated, there are no prior art grounds that a petitioner (or their privies) would be barred from raising under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). All relevant prior art for novelty (§ 102) and obviousness (§ 103) grounds would be available for a petitioner to assert in a new AIA trial.
The absence of PTAB activity on this patent is notable, especially considering its publication date (2004-09-21) and the initiation of AIA trials in 2012. Patents that are frequently asserted or hold significant value often become targets for IPRs. The lack of such challenges on US6795918 could indicate it has not been heavily asserted, or that prior art challenges have been handled in other litigation forums, or that its claims have not been perceived as vulnerable to the IPR standard.
Recommended next steps
Since no PTAB activity currently exists for US patent 6795918, a potential defendant facing assertion of this patent has several strategic considerations:
- Evaluate for potential IPR/PGR/CBM: Conduct a thorough prior art search to assess the patentability of the asserted claims under the IPR (35 U.S.C. §§ 102, 103) or PGR/CBM (35 U.S.C. §§ 101, 102, 103, 112) standards. The absence of prior PTAB challenges means a petitioner would have a "clean slate" to argue unpatentability.
- Monitor for future filings: While there are no current proceedings, this could change. Keep monitoring the USPTO PTAB E2E system for any newly filed petitions related to US6795918.
- Consider filing an IPR/PGR/CBM: If a strong prior art case can be made against the asserted claims, initiating an AIA trial could be a cost-effective defensive strategy compared to district court litigation. The fact that the patent has not been "hardened" by surviving previous PTAB challenges suggests that the patent owner has not yet had to defend its claims in this forum.
Generated 5/29/2026, 6:00:22 PM