Invalidity dossier

US 7106713

Method of rate allocation in a data communications network

Current assignee: Qualcomm Inc

Added 9/21/2026, 9:43:15 AM

At a glanceNo PTAB challengesNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.

✓ Generated

Patent Overview: US7106713B2

Title: Method of rate allocation in a data communications network

Assignee/Inventor: Original assignee Qualcomm Inc; inventor Rajesh K. Pankaj.

Key dates: Priority date 1999-03-08; filing date 2001-09-11; publication date 2006-09-12; legal status listed as "Expired – Fee Related," adjusted expiration 2021-09-30. Application number US09/954,682; other version US20020012357A1.

Classifications: H04W16/02, H04W16/10 (dynamic resource partitioning), H04W28/16, H04W28/18, and H04B7/264 (CDMA data rate control).

Purpose: To allocate a shared transmission channel's capacity dynamically among multiple data producers, since bursty data traffic makes static allocation inefficient. The control unit must know the channel's total capacity, the approximate number of producers, and producer history. It reserves a minimum basic rate for each producer, then distributes remaining capacity via allocation grants based on recent activity.

Plain-language scope: The excerpt describes estimating remaining capacity using either a limit-based scheme (FIG. 4, avoiding collisions by reserving basic rate for all producers) or a current-use-based scheme (FIG. 5/6, reserving less capacity, yielding higher estimates but risking collisions). Different basic rates may be reserved for different producer groups (FIG. 7), and capacity may be reserved for new arrivals. An equitable sharing method is shown in FIG. 10, optionally with priority by producer type or pricing. Leftover capacity may go to ineligible producers or to those otherwise limited to the basic rate. Potential overload (all producers at basic rate exceeding capacity) may be handled by temporarily allocating sub-basic or null rates (FIG. 11). FIG. 12 covers receiving a new allocation grant; FIG. 14 shows frames of 16 slots. The excerpt notes ALOHA limitations (18% pure, 37% slotted utilization) as motivation, and mentions buffer/telephone producers that may not know their own buffer capacity.

Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US7106713](/patent/US7106713)/en

What the excerpt does not establish: It omits most claims text, full specification, exact claim scope, prosecution details, and figures' complete content. It does not establish litigation, ownership transfers, validity, or prior-art conclusions. Coverage of specific embodiments is partial only.

Generated 10/1/2026, 10:01:53 PM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7106713. 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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.