Invalidity dossier
US 7259747
Interactive video display system
Current assignee: DHANDO INVESTMENTS Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 7:23:35 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: US7259747B2
Title: Interactive video display system
Patent number: US7259747B2
Application number: US10/160,217
Inventor: Matthew Bell
Original assignee: Reactrix Systems Inc
Priority date: 2001-06-05
Filing date: 2002-05-28
Publication date (grant): 2007-08-21
Status (per source): Expired – Lifetime; adjusted expiration listed as 2024-01-07
Family: Source notes the family has litigation, with a first worldwide family litigation filing indicated.
Purpose and Plain-Language Scope
According to the supplied excerpt, the invention "relates in general to image processing systems and more specifically to a system for receiving and processing an image of a human user to allow interaction with video displays." One aspect of image processing described is "human-computer interaction by detecting human forms and movements to allow interaction with images." The text notes such applications can provide "efficient or entertaining ways of interacting with images to define digital shapes or other data, animate objects, create expressive forms, etc."
The excerpt describes "motion capture" as detecting the position and movement of a human body, where "mathematical descriptions of a human performer's movements are input to a computer or other processing system." It explains that natural body movements can serve as computer inputs for studying athletic movement, capturing data for playback or simulation, and enhancing medical analysis. In some applications, an actor "may stand in front of a large video screen projection of several objects" and "can move, or otherwise generate, modify, and manipulate, the objects by using body movements."
The excerpt characterizes some motion capture techniques as complex—requiring special suits with high-visibility points, radio-frequency or other emitters, multiple sensors and detectors, blue-screens, or extensive post-processing—and states that techniques relying on simple visible-light image capture "are usually not accurate enough to provide well-defined and precise motion capture." It also lists classifications including G06F3/0425 (camera tracking an object relative to a projected/displayed image) and H04N23/20 (infrared-only image signals).
What the Excerpt Does Not Establish
The supplied excerpt does not include the claims, detailed description, drawings, or a complete prior-art discussion. It therefore does not establish the specific claimed scope, claim limitations, prosecution history, litigation details, ownership transfers, validity, or patentability over prior art.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US7259747](/patent/US7259747)/en
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:42:08 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7259747. 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.