Invalidity dossier
US 7047315
Method providing server affinity and client stickiness in a server load balancing device without TCP termination and without keeping flow states
Current assignee: Cisco Technology Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 7:54:26 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 7,047,315 B1
Title: Method providing server affinity and client stickiness in a server load balancing device without TCP termination and without keeping flow states
Assignee: Cisco Technology, Inc. (original assignee: Cisco Technology, Inc.; inventor: Sunil K. Srivastava)
Dates: Priority/filing date 2002-03-19; granted/publication date 2006-05-16; status listed as Expired – Lifetime, adjusted expiration 2024-01-08. Application number US10/102,287.
Purpose: The invention "generally relates to data processing in the field of routed data networks" and "more specifically to a method providing server affinity and client stickiness in a server load-balancing device without TCP termination and without keeping flow states." Load balancing is described as "a process of selectively routing successive client requests to one of a plurality of servers that is then currently best able to service each request." A load-balancing device determines which server should service a request and forwards it accordingly. Server affinity and client stickiness refer to keeping a given client directed to the same server across successive requests.
Plain-language scope: The excerpt frames the invention within global and local load-balancing approaches. Global approaches discussed include DNS-based selection (round-robin, weighted, and proximity values via BGP) and Cisco's Distributed Director in DNS and HTTP redirect modes, with noted disadvantages such as added latency, DNS caching problems, and manual configuration. Local approaches include Layer 2 and Layer 3 rewriting used by Cisco's Local Director, with host selection by round robin, weighted schemes, connection counts, or round-trip delay. The text also mentions WCCP "boomerang" DNS schemes and their scalability problems, plus caching drawbacks for content providers, and introduces IPv6 multicast, unicast, and "labeling mechanisms." The excerpt cuts off mid-sentence at that point.
What the excerpt does not establish: The specific method steps for achieving server affinity and client stickiness without TCP termination or retained flow states, the detailed claims, and the full labeled-mechanism description are not provided.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:43 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7047315. 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.