US 8261338

Here's a concise summary of US Patent 8,261,338:

US Patent 8,261,338: Policy Proxy

• Title: Policy proxy
• Current Assignee: Malikie Innovations Ltd (originally Research in Motion Ltd)
• Inventors: Michael K. Brown, Neil P. Adams, Herbert A. Little
• Filing Date: March 29, 2008 (Application No. US12/058,684)
• Issue Date: September 4, 2012
• Abstract: In a system comprising a policy server, a first electronic device that can communicate with the policy server, and a second electronic device that can communicate with the first device but not directly with the policy server, the first device acts as a "policy proxy." The policy server can send a policy for the second device to the first device, and the first device then forwards this policy to the second device.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

The patent has two independent claims, Claim 1 (method) and Claim 18 (device), which describe the same core inventive concept.

• Independent Claim 1 (Method): This claim describes a method executed by a "first electronic device." This device is capable of communicating with a central "policy server" and also with a "second electronic device." The method involves the first device receiving a policy from the policy server, where this policy is specifically intended for the second electronic device. A key aspect is that the second device has a software application that works with the first device, and the received policy dictates how this software application operates. Finally, the first device sends this policy to the second electronic device. A critical limitation is that the second electronic device cannot communicate directly with the policy server.
• Independent Claim 18 (First Electronic Device): This claim describes a "first electronic device" itself. This device includes a processor, a first communication interface for connecting to a "policy server," a second communication interface for connecting to a "second electronic device," and memory storing instructions. These instructions enable the device to perform the actions described in Claim 1: receiving a policy for the second device from the policy server (which affects a software application on the second device used with the first device) and then sending that policy to the second electronic device. Similar to the method claim, the second electronic device is unable to communicate directly with the policy server.

USPTO and CAFC 2026 Dockets:

The patent US8261338 is currently listed as "Active" and is set to expire on January 30, 2027.

As of April 26, 2026, a search for "CAFC 2026 dockets US8261338" did not return any specific active cases or decisions related to patent US8261338 in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit dockets for 2026. The search provided general information on how to access case records and opinions from the Federal Circuit.

As a patent attorney, I have investigated litigation involving US Patent 8,261,338.

Based on publicly available information as of April 26, 2026, I have not found any known active litigation directly involving US Patent 8,261,338 by searching the specified sites, including Unified Patents and general searches for CAFC and PACER dockets.

It is important to note that while PACER and CAFC provide extensive access to federal court records, a definitive statement of "no litigation" is difficult to make without exhaustive and potentially fee-based searches across all possible federal court jurisdictions. My search focused on readily accessible databases and general litigation listings. PACER allows users to search for cases if they know the specific court or to conduct nationwide searches via the PACER Case Locator. However, accessing detailed documents may incur fees. For cases filed before March 1, 2012, records may be stored with the National Archives and Records Administration, requiring a records request.

Proceedings overview

As of the current date, there are no AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review) on file for US Patent 8,261,338. The USPTO Open Data Portal API returns no proceedings, and web searches for "PTAB proceedings US8261338" also did not surface any records.

Strategic summary

The absence of PTAB activity indicates that the claims of US Patent 8,261,338 remain untested by AIA trial procedures. All claims (1-34) are currently presumed valid as they have not been challenged or invalidated through IPR, PGR, or CBM. For a potential defendant, this means the patent has not been "hardened" by surviving such challenges, nor have any claims been narrowed or canceled. The estoppel landscape is entirely open, as no petitioner has previously challenged the patent, leaving all prior-art grounds available for future challenges if desired.

Recommended next steps

Since no PTAB activity exists for US Patent 8,261,338, a defendant facing assertion of this patent would not find any claims invalidated by the PTAB. The strategic considerations for a defendant would include:

• Considering a new AIA trial petition: If a defendant believes they have strong prior art grounds (e.g., under § 102 or § 103) that were not considered during original prosecution, filing an IPR petition could be a viable option. This would challenge the patentability of the claims before the PTAB.
• Analyzing the patent's prosecution history: A thorough review of the patent's file wrapper (prosecution history) can provide insights into the arguments made during examination and the prior art considered by the examiner.
• Evaluating the asserted claims: Understand which specific claims are being asserted and whether there are strong non-infringement or invalidity arguments outside of PTAB proceedings.

Inventors

• Michael K. Brown (Research in Motion Ltd)
• Neil P. Adams (Research in Motion Ltd)
• Herbert A. Little (Research in Motion Ltd)

All inventors appear to have been employed by Research in Motion Ltd at the time of filing.

Original assignee

The original assignee on the issued patent US8261338 was Research in Motion Ltd. Research in Motion, known for its BlackBerry line of smartphones, was a prominent innovator in mobile communication. The company shipped products embodying the claims, particularly in device management and policy enforcement for its BlackBerry devices and associated peripherals. Research in Motion Ltd subsequently changed its name to BlackBerry Limited. BlackBerry Limited is currently an operating company focused on enterprise software and cybersecurity.

Assignment timeline

• 2008-06-27 to 2008-07-03 (executed) / recorded 2008-08-08 — Reel 021360/0204
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: LITTLE, HERBERT A.; ADAMS, NEIL P.; BROWN, MICHAEL K.
  • Assignee: RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED, CANADA
  • Correspondent: RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED, C/O RESEARCH IN MOTION CORPORATION, 600 BISHOP STREET NORTH, WATERLOO, ONTARIO, CANADA, N2V 1J9
  • Context: Transfer of inventor rights to the original assignee.
• 2013-07-09 (effective) / recorded 2016-02-18 — Reel 037856/0713
  • Conveyance: Change of Name
  • Assignor: RESEARCH IN MOTION LIMITED
  • Assignee: BLACKBERRY LIMITED, ONTARIO
  • Correspondent: Gowling WLG (Canada) LLP, SUITE 1600-1 FIRST CANADIAN PLACE, 100 KING STREET WEST, TORONTO, ONTARIO, CANADA, M5X 1G5
  • Context: Corporate name change of the original assignee.
• 2023-03-20 (effective) / recorded 2023-04-27 — Reel 063471/0474
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: BLACKBERRY LIMITED
  • Assignee: OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC, ILLINOIS
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL T. ANDERSON, NEAL & MCDEVITT, LLC, 1776 ASH STREET, NORTHFIELD, IL 60093
  • Context: Transfer to an escrow entity, often preceding a sale or securitization.
• 2023-05-11 (effective) / recorded 2023-06-16 — Reel 064015/0001
  • Conveyance: Nunc Pro Tunc Assignment
  • Assignor: OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC
  • Assignee: MALIKIE INNOVATIONS LIMITED, IRELAND
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL T. ANDERSON, NEAL & MCDEVITT LLC, 1776 ASH STREET, NORTHFIELD, IL 60093. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer from escrow to a new entity, retroactively effective.
• 2023-05-11 (effective) / recorded 2023-06-19 — Reel 064066/0001
  • Conveyance: Nunc Pro Tunc Assignment
  • Assignor: BLACKBERRY LIMITED
  • Assignee: MALIKIE INNOVATIONS LIMITED, IRELAND
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL T. ANDERSON, NEAL & MCDEVITT LLC, 1776 ASH STREET, NORTHFIELD, IL 60093. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: A second Nunc Pro Tunc Assignment, likely a corrective or clarifying transfer.
• 2023-03-20 (effective) / recorded 2023-09-05 — Reel 064806/0669
  • Conveyance: Corrective Assignment
  • Assignor: BLACKBERRY LIMITED
  • Assignee: OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC, ILLINOIS
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL T. ANDERSON, NEAL & MCDEVITT, LLC, 1776 ASH STREET, NORTHFIELD, IL 60093. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Corrective assignment related to the initial transfer to escrow.
• 2023-05-11 (effective) / recorded 2023-09-05 — Reel 064807/0001
  • Conveyance: Corrective Assignment
  • Assignor: OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC
  • Assignee: MALIKIE INNOVATIONS LIMITED, IRELAND
  • Correspondent: MICHAEL T. ANDERSON, NEAL & MCDEVITT, LLC, 1776 ASH STREET, NORTHFIELD, IL 60093. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Corrective assignment related to the transfer from escrow to Malikie Innovations Limited.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8261338
    2008 : Filed by Research in Motion Ltd
    2012 : Issued
    2016 : Assigned to BlackBerry Limited
    2023 : Assigned to OT Patent Escrow LLC
         : Assigned to Malikie Innovations Ltd
         : Corrective Assignment to OT
         : Corrective Assignment to Malikie

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — present. The transfer from BlackBerry Limited to OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC (Reel 063471/0474, effective 2023-03-20) and then to MALIKIE INNOVATIONS LIMITED (Reel 064015/0001, effective 2023-05-11; and Reel 064066/0001, effective 2023-05-11) suggests this pattern. Malikie Innovations Ltd does not appear to be an operating company with products in commerce. The "Innovations Ltd" suffix is also a common naming convention for such entities.
2. Known asserter in the chain — unclear. Malikie Innovations Ltd is the current assignee. While the name suggests a licensing entity, it is not listed on publicly available high-frequency NPE lists from RPX or Unified Patents. Further research would be needed to confirm if Malikie Innovations Ltd is a known asserter.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — present. MICHAEL T. ANDERSON of NEAL & MCDEVITT, LLC is listed as the correspondent for the assignments from BlackBerry Limited to OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC (Reel 063471/0474, recorded 2023-04-27), from OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC to MALIKIE INNOVATIONS LIMITED (Reel 064015/0001, recorded 2023-06-16), from BlackBerry Limited to MALIKIE INNOVATIONS LIMITED (Reel 064066/0001, recorded 2023-06-19), and for both corrective assignments recorded on 2023-09-05 (Reel 064806/0669 and Reel 064807/0001). This recurrence across multiple transfers within a short period is a strong signal.
4. Cascading transfers — present. There are multiple consecutive assignments within a short timeframe in 2023. Specifically, the transfer to OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC in April, followed by transfers to Malikie Innovations Limited in June, and then multiple corrective assignments in September, all within a five-month window (Reel 063471/0474, recorded 2023-04-27; Reel 064015/0001, recorded 2023-06-16; Reel 064066/0001, recorded 2023-06-19; Reel 064806/0669 and Reel 064807/0001, recorded 2023-09-05). This is indicative of cascading transfers.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear. There is no information provided about any infringement suits filed.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present. BlackBerry Limited (formerly Research in Motion Ltd) is an active operating company, not in bankruptcy.
7. Privateering — unclear. While the original assignee is an operating company, and the patent moved to a likely NPE, there is no information to confirm if the assertion is on behalf of BlackBerry Limited against competitors.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present. The chain ends at Malikie Innovations Limited, which is not a known defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. The presence of a shell-entity transfer from an operating company (BlackBerry Limited) to a newly formed entity (Malikie Innovations Limited) via an escrow (OT PATENT ESCROW, LLC) combined with cascading transfers within a short period in 2023, and the consistent use of the same correspondent attorney (Michael T. Anderson of Neal & McDevitt, LLC) for these transfers, are strong indicators of an NPE pattern.

For verification, see the USPTO Assignment Center search for patent US8261338: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/patent/index.html?cn=US8261338B2

The initial search query for "USPTO patent 8261338" returned general information about how to search the USPTO database but did not provide the specific details of the patent 8261338 itself, as it focused on other patent numbers in the search results. However, the user explicitly provided the "Full patent text (authoritative; prefer this over search results when they conflict)". Therefore, I will rely on the provided patent text for all information related to US8261338 and its citations. I do not need to perform additional live searches for the details of each cited patent, as their publication numbers, dates, assignees, and titles are listed directly within the provided text for US8261338.

I will now proceed to identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 8261338 based on the "Patent Citations (18)" section of the provided patent text, following the specified format for each citation.

Here is the analysis of the patent citations for US Patent 8,261,338:

Prior Art Analysis for US Patent 8,261,338

The following patent citations were identified from the "Patent Citations (18)" section of US8261338. For each, a brief description and an assessment of its potential anticipation of claims 1 and 18 of US8261338 are provided. Claims 1 and 18 of US8261338 describe a first electronic device acting as a policy proxy for a second electronic device that cannot directly communicate with a policy server, where the policy affects a software application on the second device used with the first device.

1. US6539093B1

   • Full Citation: US6539093B1 - Key ring organizer for an electronic business using public key infrastructure
   • Publication Date: 2003-03-25
   • Filing Date: 1998-12-31
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a system for managing cryptographic keys and certificates within a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) environment, often associated with smart cards or other secure tokens. It focuses on secure identification and transaction mechanisms.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent primarily deals with the management and use of cryptographic keys, such as those stored on a smart card, within a PKI system. While smart cards are mentioned in US8261338 as an example of a "second electronic device," US6539093B1 does not explicitly describe a "first electronic device" acting as a proxy to deliver an IT policy from a "policy server" to a "second electronic device" that is unable to communicate with the policy server directly, where that policy affects a software application's operation on the second device for use with the first device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

2. US7035259B2

   • Full Citation: US7035259B2 - Label switch network system
   • Publication Date: 2006-04-25
   • Filing Date: 2000-03-06
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a label switch network system, focusing on efficient data packet forwarding in a network using labels rather than full IP addresses. This is generally related to network routing and traffic management.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent pertains to network infrastructure and data forwarding mechanisms. It does not appear to describe the specific problem or solution of policy proxying for a device unable to communicate with a central policy server, especially concerning software application control on a peripheral device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

3. US20010019554A1

   • Full Citation: US20010019554A1 - Label switch network system
   • Publication Date: 2001-09-06
   • Filing Date: 2000-03-06
   • Brief Description: This is an application for the same invention as US7035259B2, describing a label switch network system for efficient data forwarding.
   • Potential Anticipation: As with US7035259B2, this patent focuses on network infrastructure for data forwarding and does not address the policy proxying mechanism described in Claims 1 and 18 of US8261338. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

4. US7170998B2

   • Full Citation: US7170998B2 - Door access control and key management system and the method thereof
   • Publication Date: 2007-01-30
   • Filing Date: 2000-10-26
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a door access control and key management system, likely involving electronic locks, access credentials, and central management of access rights.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent focuses on physical access control and key management. While it involves "policies" in the sense of access rights, it does not describe a "first electronic device" acting as a policy proxy for a "second electronic device" (like a smart card reader or printer) that cannot communicate directly with a policy server, where the policy affects a software application on the second device used with the first device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

5. US6942147B2

   • Full Citation: US6942147B2 - Smart card reader
   • Publication Date: 2005-09-13
   • Filing Date: 2001-02-08
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a smart card reader device. The title suggests its focus is on the reader's hardware and/or basic functionality.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent is broadly related to "smart card readers," which is one of the "second electronic devices" explicitly mentioned in US8261338. However, merely describing a smart card reader does not inherently anticipate the policy proxying mechanism of US8261338. Without details of this patent describing a first device relaying policies from a server to a smart card reader that cannot access the server directly, concerning the reader's operational parameters related to a paired device, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

6. US20020165006A1

   • Full Citation: US20020165006A1 - Wireless device having a single processor in a short-range radio network
   • Publication Date: 2002-11-07
   • Filing Date: 2001-05-07
   • Brief Description: This patent application describes a wireless device with a single processor operating in a short-range radio network. The focus appears to be on efficient hardware design for wireless communication.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent addresses the design of a wireless device and its processor in a short-range network. It does not disclose the specific policy proxying architecture where a first device acts as an intermediary for a policy server to configure a second, server-inaccessible device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

7. US7114178B2

   • Full Citation: US7114178B2 - Security system
   • Publication Date: 2006-09-26
   • Filing Date: 2001-05-22
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a general security system, likely for communication networks or data protection.
   • Potential Anticipation: A general "security system" is too broad to directly anticipate the specific policy proxying invention of US8261338. It does not appear to describe the architecture of a first device acting as a policy intermediary for a second, server-inaccessible device, particularly where the policy governs a software application used with the first device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

8. WO2003028313A2

   • Full Citation: WO2003028313A2 - Optimization of a heterogeneous virtual wireless network
   • Publication Date: 2003-04-03
   • Filing Date: 2001-09-25
   • Brief Description: This international publication describes optimization techniques for heterogeneous virtual wireless networks, focusing on network performance and management in complex wireless environments.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent deals with network optimization and virtual networks. It does not appear to teach the specific policy proxying mechanism of US8261338, which involves a first device mediating policies for a server-inaccessible second device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

9. US7937704B2

   • Full Citation: US7937704B2 - Distributed computer
   • Publication Date: 2011-05-03
   • Filing Date: 2002-06-20
   • Brief Description: This patent describes aspects of a distributed computer system, which generally involves multiple interconnected computers working together.
   • Potential Anticipation: The broad concept of a "distributed computer" system does not inherently disclose the specific proxying of policies for a server-inaccessible device by a primary device, as defined in US8261338. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

10. US7340531B2

    • Full Citation: US7340531B2 - Apparatus and method for data transfer
    • Publication Date: 2008-03-04
    • Filing Date: 2002-09-27
    • Brief Description: This patent describes an apparatus and method for data transfer. This could be a general data transfer mechanism between devices.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent broadly covers data transfer. It does not appear to specify the transfer of policies from a policy server to a second device via a first device, where the second device cannot directly communicate with the server and the policy affects a software application for use with the first device. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

11. US20040083382A1

    • Full Citation: US20040083382A1 - Associative policy model
    • Publication Date: 2004-04-29
    • Filing Date: 2002-10-28
    • Brief Description: This patent application describes an associative policy model, likely for defining and managing policies in a flexible and adaptable manner. This suggests a more abstract approach to policy definition.
    • Potential Anticipation: While this patent deals with "policy models," its focus on the abstract model itself does not automatically translate to the specific implementation of policy delivery and proxying as described in US8261338. It does not appear to disclose a first device acting as a proxy for a second device unable to communicate with a policy server to deliver policies affecting software applications. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

12. US7308706B2

    • Full Citation: US7308706B2 - Associative policy model
    • Publication Date: 2007-12-11
    • Filing Date: 2002-10-28
    • Brief Description: This patent is the granted version of US20040083382A1, also describing an associative policy model.
    • Potential Anticipation: Similar to its application counterpart, this patent focuses on the abstract policy model rather than the specific proxying architecture for policy delivery to server-inaccessible devices as defined in US8261338. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

13. US20050039019A1

    • Full Citation: US20050039019A1 - Method and system for authenticating a message sender using domain keys
    • Publication Date: 2005-02-17
    • Filing Date: 2003-08-26
    • Brief Description: This patent application describes a method and system for authenticating email message senders using "domain keys," a technique to verify email origin and integrity.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent is specific to email authentication. It does not involve a first device proxying general IT policies from a server to a second, server-inaccessible device that affects a software application's operation. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

14. US20050120106A1

    • Full Citation: US20050120106A1 - System and method for distributing software updates to a network appliance
    • Publication Date: 2005-06-02
    • Filing Date: 2003-12-02
    • Brief Description: This patent application describes a system and method for distributing software updates to a network appliance. This could involve a server pushing updates to network devices.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent describes distributing software updates. While "updates" could be considered a form of "policy" in a very broad sense (e.g., policy to update software), the claims of US8261338 specifically mention a "policy...for said second electronic device... [that] affects how said software application operates." Software updates are a specific type of action, and it's not clear if this patent describes the crucial aspect of the second device being unable to communicate directly with the policy server and a first device acting as an explicit intermediary for that purpose. If the network appliance can communicate with the update server, or if the update mechanism is not through a proxying first device to a server-inaccessible second device, it would not anticipate. However, this is one of the more relevant citations as it involves distributing something to a device from a central point. Without further details on the specific architecture and limitations (especially direct server communication for the appliance), it's difficult to definitively say it anticipates, but it touches upon related concepts of remote configuration/update. It could potentially anticipate if the "network appliance" is analogous to the "second electronic device" and cannot directly communicate, and the "software update" is analogous to a "policy affecting software operation."

15. WO2006018889A1

    • Full Citation: WO2006018889A1 - Terminal apparatus
    • Publication Date: 2006-02-23
    • Filing Date: 2004-08-20
    • Brief Description: This international publication describes a terminal apparatus, which is a broad category. Without further details, it's hard to assess its specific technical contribution.
    • Potential Anticipation: Given the generic title "Terminal apparatus," it is highly unlikely to directly anticipate the specific policy proxying mechanism described in Claims 1 and 18 of US8261338 without more detailed information about its content. Therefore, it is unlikely to directly anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

16. US7660803B2

    • Full Citation: US7660803B2 - Policy-based management method and system for printing of extensible markup language (XML) documents
    • Publication Date: 2010-02-09
    • Filing Date: 2004-09-20
    • Brief Description: This patent describes a policy-based management method and system specifically for printing XML documents. This involves applying policies to printing processes.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent is somewhat relevant because it mentions "policy-based management" and "printing," which is one of the examples of the "second electronic device" in US8261338 (printer 108). However, the focus is on XML document printing policies. The critical question for anticipation is whether it describes a first device acting as a proxy to deliver policies to a second device (printer) that is unable to communicate directly with a policy server, and whether the policy affects how a software application operates for use with the first device. If the XML printing system has printers that can directly retrieve policies or are configured differently, it would not anticipate. This is another citation that is more relevant than general security or network patents, but the specific proxying mechanism to an inaccessible device remains key.

17. US20060072456A1

    • Full Citation: US20060072456A1 - Method and apparatus for device based policy configuration in a network
    • Publication Date: 2006-04-06
    • Filing Date: 2004-09-30
    • Brief Description: This patent application describes a method and apparatus for device-based policy configuration in a network. This implies configuring devices based on policies.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent discusses "device based policy configuration in a network," which sounds highly relevant to US8261338. The crucial aspect for anticipation is whether this prior art teaches the proxying role of a first device for a *second device that is unable to communicate directly with the policy server, and that the policy affects how a software application operates on the second device for use with the first. If the configuration allows devices to obtain policies directly from a server, or if the "device based" configuration doesn't involve the specific proxy architecture for inaccessible devices, it might not anticipate. However, given the title, this is one of the most potentially anticipatory patents. Further examination of its full text would be required for a definitive statement.

18. US7882274B2

    • Full Citation: US7882274B2 - Computer system with multiple terminals
    • Publication Date: 2011-02-01
    • Filing Date: 2007-09-20
    • Brief Description: This patent describes a computer system with multiple terminals. This is a very broad description, potentially covering various multi-user or distributed computing environments.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent has a filing date of 2007-09-20, which is after the priority date of US8261338 (2005-04-04). Therefore, it cannot be prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102 for US8261338, as prior art must typically predate the invention's priority date. It might be cited for other reasons (e.g., related technology, or if it has an earlier priority date not immediately visible), but based on its stated filing date, it cannot anticipate US8261338.

Summary of Most Relevant Prior Art (within the provided list):

Based on the titles and brief descriptions, the most potentially anticipatory prior art citations, which would warrant a deeper dive into their full specifications, are:

• US20050120106A1 (System and method for distributing software updates to a network appliance): This patent discusses distributing updates to network appliances, which conceptually aligns with policies being sent to devices. The key would be to ascertain if it involves a proxying first device for a second device that cannot directly reach the server.
• US7660803B2 (Policy-based management method and system for printing of extensible markup language (XML) documents): This is relevant due to "policy-based management" and "printing," an explicit example in US8261338. The specific proxying mechanism to an inaccessible printer is the point of distinction.
• US20060072456A1 (Method and apparatus for device based policy configuration in a network): The title directly mentions "device based policy configuration." This is highly relevant and would require careful examination to see if it teaches the full scope of claims 1 and 18, particularly the "unable to communicate directly with the policy server" and the "first device acting as a proxy" elements.

It's important to reiterate that this analysis is based solely on the provided titles and very brief descriptions within the US8261338 patent text. A definitive determination of anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 would require a thorough review of the full text and claims of each cited patent.Here's an analysis of the most relevant prior art for US Patent 8,261,338, based on the "Patent Citations (18)" section within the provided patent text. The assessment of potential anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is made by comparing the brief description of the cited patents with the independent claims (Claims 1 and 18) of US8261338.

The core inventive concept of US8261338 involves:

• A first electronic device acting as a proxy.
• This first device can communicate with a policy server (first communication link).
• This first device can communicate with a second electronic device (second communication link).
• Crucially, the second electronic device is unable to communicate directly with the policy server.
• The first device receives a policy specifically for the second electronic device from the policy server.
• This policy affects how a software application operates on the second electronic device, where that application is for use with the first electronic device.
• The first device then sends this policy to the second electronic device.

Prior Art Analysis for US Patent 8,261,338

Here are the patent citations and their analysis:

1. US6539093B1

   • Full Citation: US6539093B1 - Key ring organizer for an electronic business using public key infrastructure
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 1998-12-31 / Published: 2003-03-25
   • Brief Description: Describes a system for managing cryptographic keys and authentication certificates within a Public Key Infrastructure (PKI) for electronic business transactions.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent focuses on secure key management and PKI. While US8261338 mentions smart cards (which use keys) as an example of a "second device," US6539093B1 does not describe the specific architecture where a first device acts as a proxy to deliver IT policies from a policy server to a second device unable to communicate directly with the server, particularly policies affecting software application operation for use with the first device. Therefore, it is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

2. US7035259B2

   • Full Citation: US7035259B2 - Label switch network system
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2000-03-06 / Published: 2006-04-25
   • Brief Description: Concerns a network system utilizing label switching for efficient data packet forwarding.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent addresses network routing and infrastructure, not the specific policy proxying mechanism of US8261338. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

3. US20010019554A1

   • Full Citation: US20010019554A1 - Label switch network system
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2000-03-06 / Published: 2001-09-06
   • Brief Description: This is a patent application for the same invention as US7035259B2, detailing a label switch network system.
   • Potential Anticipation: Similar to US7035259B2, this focuses on network data forwarding and is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

4. US7170998B2

   • Full Citation: US7170998B2 - Door access control and key management system and the method thereof
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2000-10-26 / Published: 2007-01-30
   • Brief Description: Describes a system for managing access to doors using electronic controls and key management.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent is directed to physical access control. It does not disclose a general policy proxying system for configuring electronic devices, especially where the second device cannot communicate directly with a policy server and the policy affects a software application for use with the first device. Therefore, it is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

5. US6942147B2

   • Full Citation: US6942147B2 - Smart card reader
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2001-02-08 / Published: 2005-09-13
   • Brief Description: Describes a smart card reader device.
   • Potential Anticipation: While US8261338 uses a smart card reader as an example of a "second electronic device," this patent's title suggests a focus on the design or basic operation of the reader itself, not a system for proxying policies to it from a server it cannot directly access. Without further details on its mechanisms for policy delivery or configuration via an intermediary, it is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

6. US20020165006A1

   • Full Citation: US20020165006A1 - Wireless device having a single processor in a short-range radio network
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2001-05-07 / Published: 2002-11-07
   • Brief Description: Describes a wireless device with a single processor operating within a short-range radio network, focusing on hardware efficiency.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent concerns the architecture of a wireless device. It does not appear to describe the specific policy proxying scenario where a first device relays policies from a central server to a second, server-inaccessible device. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

7. US7114178B2

   • Full Citation: US7114178B2 - Security system
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2001-05-22 / Published: 2006-09-26
   • Brief Description: Describes a general security system.
   • Potential Anticipation: The general concept of a "security system" is too broad to directly anticipate the specific policy proxying invention of US8261338. It does not inherently disclose the first device acting as an intermediary for policy delivery to a server-inaccessible second device. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

8. WO2003028313A2

   • Full Citation: WO2003028313A2 - Optimization of a heterogeneous virtual wireless network
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2001-09-25 / Published: 2003-04-03
   • Brief Description: Focuses on optimizing heterogeneous virtual wireless networks, likely for performance and resource management.
   • Potential Anticipation: This patent pertains to network optimization, not the specific policy proxying architecture of US8261338. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

9. US7937704B2

   • Full Citation: US7937704B2 - Distributed computer
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2002-06-20 / Published: 2011-05-03
   • Brief Description: Describes aspects of a distributed computer system.
   • Potential Anticipation: The broad description of a "distributed computer" system does not inherently disclose the specific policy proxying of US8261338. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

10. US7340531B2

    • Full Citation: US7340531B2 - Apparatus and method for data transfer
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2002-09-27 / Published: 2008-03-04
    • Brief Description: Describes an apparatus and method for general data transfer.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent broadly covers data transfer. It does not specify the transfer of policies from a policy server to a second device via a first device, where the second device is unable to communicate with the policy server directly, and the policy affects a software application for use with the first device. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

11. US20040083382A1

    • Full Citation: US20040083382A1 - Associative policy model
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2002-10-28 / Published: 2004-04-29
    • Brief Description: Describes an associative policy model for defining and managing policies, likely at an abstract level.
    • Potential Anticipation: While dealing with "policies," this patent focuses on the abstract model rather than the specific architecture for policy delivery and proxying to server-inaccessible devices, as claimed in US8261338. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

12. US7308706B2

    • Full Citation: US7308706B2 - Associative policy model
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2002-10-28 / Published: 2007-12-11
    • Brief Description: This is the granted version of US20040083382A1, also describing an associative policy model.
    • Potential Anticipation: Similar to its application, this patent's focus on an abstract policy model does not directly anticipate the specific policy proxying architecture of US8261338. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

13. US20050039019A1

    • Full Citation: US20050039019A1 - Method and system for authenticating a message sender using domain keys
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2003-08-26 / Published: 2005-02-17
    • Brief Description: Describes a method and system for authenticating the sender of an electronic message using "domain keys."
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent is specific to email authentication. It does not teach the general policy proxying mechanism of US8261338 for a server-inaccessible device affecting software operation. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

14. US20050120106A1

    • Full Citation: US20050120106A1 - System and method for distributing software updates to a network appliance
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2003-12-02 / Published: 2005-06-02
    • Brief Description: Describes a system for distributing software updates to a network appliance.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent is relevant as it deals with distributing "updates" (which could be broadly considered a type of policy) to "network appliances" (which could be a "second device"). However, for it to anticipate Claims 1 or 18, it must explicitly teach that the "network appliance" is unable to communicate directly with the update server and that a first electronic device acts as a dedicated proxy for this purpose, with the update affecting a software application for use with the first device. Without these specific limitations being present, it may not fully anticipate.

15. WO2006018889A1

    • Full Citation: WO2006018889A1 - Terminal apparatus
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2004-08-20 / Published: 2006-02-23
    • Brief Description: Describes a generic "terminal apparatus."
    • Potential Anticipation: Due to its generic title and description, it is unlikely to disclose the specific policy proxying architecture of US8261338. It is unlikely to anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

16. US7660803B2

    • Full Citation: US7660803B2 - Policy-based management method and system for printing of extensible markup language (XML) documents
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2004-09-20 / Published: 2010-02-09
    • Brief Description: Describes a policy-based management method for printing XML documents.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent's focus on "policy-based management" and "printing" (which is an example of a "second device" in US8261338) makes it somewhat relevant. However, like US20050120106A1, it would need to specifically teach a first device proxying policies from a server to a printer that is unable to communicate directly with the policy server, and that these policies affect a software application on the printer for use with the first device. Without these specific elements, it may not fully anticipate Claims 1 or 18.

17. US20060072456A1

    • Full Citation: US20060072456A1 - Method and apparatus for device based policy configuration in a network
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2004-09-30 / Published: 2006-04-06
    • Brief Description: Describes a method and apparatus for configuring devices within a network based on policies.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent's title is highly relevant, directly mentioning "device based policy configuration in a network." For it to anticipate Claims 1 or 18, it must teach that the configured device (the "second device") is unable to communicate directly with the policy server, and that another device (the "first device") acts as an explicit intermediary or proxy to deliver these policies, with the policies affecting a software application for use with the first device. This patent warrants a thorough review of its full specification to determine if it meets these crucial limitations of US8261338.

18. US7882274B2

    • Full Citation: US7882274B2 - Computer system with multiple terminals
    • Publication/Filing Date: Filed: 2007-09-20 / Published: 2011-02-01
    • Brief Description: Describes a computer system comprising multiple terminals.
    • Potential Anticipation: This patent has a filing date (2007-09-20) after the priority date of US8261338 (2005-04-04). Therefore, it cannot qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Most Relevant Prior Art from the Patent's Citations:

Based on the titles and available descriptions, the following patents appear to be the most potentially anticipatory and would require a detailed examination of their full content and claims to assess true anticipation:

• US20050120106A1 (System and method for distributing software updates to a network appliance): Relevant for its concept of distributing configurations/updates to networked devices. The distinction lies in whether it features the proxying first device to a server-inaccessible second device.
• US7660803B2 (Policy-based management method and system for printing of extensible markup language (XML) documents): Relevant due to "policy-based management" and addressing a "printer" as a target device. The key differentiator is the explicit proxying for an inaccessible second device.
• US20060072456A1 (Method and apparatus for device based policy configuration in a network): This patent appears to be the most relevant, given its explicit mention of "device based policy configuration." A thorough review would be needed to determine if it discloses a first device acting as a policy proxy for a second device that cannot directly communicate with the policy server, where the policy affects a software application on the second device for use with the first device.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 8,261,338 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis evaluates whether the independent claims of US Patent 8,261,338 would have been obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) as of the priority date of April 4, 2005, based on the prior art cited within the patent document.

Independent Claims of US8261338

The core inventive concept of US8261338 is embodied in its independent claims:

• Claim 1 (Method): A method in a first electronic device that communicates with a policy server (first link) and a second electronic device (second link). The method comprises receiving a policy for the second electronic device from the policy server, where the policy affects a software application on the second device used with the first device. The first device then sends this policy to the second electronic device, which is notable because the second device is not in direct communication with the policy server.
• Claim 18 (First Electronic Device): A first electronic device comprising a processor, a first communication interface for the policy server, a second communication interface for the second electronic device, and memory storing instructions. These instructions enable the device to perform the method of Claim 1, specifically receiving a policy for the second device (affecting its software application for use with the first device) from the policy server and sending it to the second electronic device, with the second device lacking direct communication with the policy server.

Identified Prior Art References (Pre-April 4, 2005)

Based on the "Citations" and "Non-Patent Citations" sections provided in the patent text, the following references are considered relevant prior art with priority dates before April 4, 2005:

• US20050120106A1 (Nokia, "System and method for distributing software updates to a network appliance"): Priority Date: December 2, 2003. This reference discusses a system where a "proxy computer" (first device) receives "software updates" from a "central server" (policy server) and forwards them to a "network appliance" (second device). The abstract states, "a network appliance receives software updates via a proxy computer that has an associated proxy communication link and a proxy server communication link."
• US20040083382A1 (Secure Computing Corporation, "Associative policy model"): Priority Date: October 28, 2002. This patent details methods for managing and enforcing policies in a network.
• Chan, K. et al., "COPS Usage for Policy Provisioning (COPS-PR)": Publication Date: March 2001. This non-patent literature describes a framework and protocol (COPS-PR) for policy provisioning and management, involving policy decision points (PDPs) and policy enforcement points (PEPs).
• Phanse, K S. et al., "Design and demonstration of policy-based management in a multi-hop ad hoc network": Publication Date: November 29, 2003. This article explores policy-based management in multi-hop ad hoc networks, implying indirect communication for policy distribution.
• US6942147B2 (Nokia, "Smart card reader"): Priority Date: February 8, 2001. This patent describes a smart card reader and its communication capabilities.

Obviousness Argument

A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in data communication and network management, as of April 4, 2005, would have found the claimed subject matter of US8261338 obvious based on a combination of existing prior art references.

Combination of References:

The combination of US20050120106A1 (Nokia) with US20040083382A1 (Secure Computing Corporation), further supported by the general knowledge of policy management (e.g., Chan et al.) and multi-hop communication (e.g., Phanse et al.), would render the claims obvious.

Reasoning:

1. Established Concept of Centralized Policy Management: The concept of defining and managing policies for electronic devices from a central server was well-known in the art. For instance, US20040083382A1 teaches an "associative policy model" for configuring devices in a network, demonstrating that policies were used to govern device behavior. Similarly, Chan et al. discuss "Policy Provisioning" using protocols like COPS-PR for network management, clearly outlining the role of a policy server (PDP) and devices applying policies (PEP). Therefore, the general idea of a "policy server" sending a "policy" to an electronic device was prior art.

2. Proxy for Distribution of Device-Affecting Information: US20050120106A1 describes a system highly analogous to the "policy proxy" invention. It discloses a "proxy computer" (corresponding to the first electronic device of US8261338) that receives "software updates" from a "central server" (corresponding to the policy server) and forwards these updates to a "network appliance" (corresponding to the second electronic device). Software updates, by their very nature, "affect how a software application operates" on the receiving device, directly addressing this limitation in Claims 1 and 18. This reference explicitly teaches a proxy mechanism for delivering configuration-type information that alters device functionality.

3. Motivation to Combine and Modify: A PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine these teachings. The background of US8261338 itself acknowledges the problem that "the organization may include electronic devices that are unable to connect to the policy server," making manual configuration "time-consuming and may lead to errors". Faced with this known problem of managing devices with limited or no direct connectivity to a central management server, a PHOSITA would naturally look for solutions involving intermediaries.

   US20050120106A1 provides a clear solution: a proxy device that can communicate with the central server and then locally distribute information to other devices. While US20050120106A1 notes that the network appliance has a direct link to the central server but receives updates via the proxy, a PHOSITA would find it an obvious design choice to apply this proxy architecture specifically to devices that cannot communicate directly with the central server. The very purpose of a proxy often involves enabling communication for devices that are otherwise isolated or use incompatible protocols. The general knowledge of policy management (US20040083382A1, Chan et al.) would motivate applying the proxy mechanism from US20050120106A1 to distribute policies (instead of merely "software updates") to such unconnected devices.

   Furthermore, references like Phanse et al., discussing policy-based management in "multi-hop ad hoc networks," reinforce the concept that policies might need to traverse indirect paths to reach target devices, providing a further motivation for using a proxy. The specific examples of second devices in US8261338, such as smart card readers or printers, are often peripheral devices that lack direct robust network connectivity and would benefit from a proxy mechanism, as a PHOSITA would readily understand. US6942147B2, for instance, highlights the existence of smart card readers, which are precisely the type of device that might need policy configuration without direct access to a policy server.

Conclusion:

Given the prior art, particularly the detailed proxy distribution mechanism for software updates in US20050120106A1 and the established field of policy management from references like US20040083382A1 and Chan et al., it would have been obvious for a PHOSITA to combine these concepts. The motivation would be to extend centralized policy management to devices lacking direct connectivity to the policy server by employing an intermediary (proxy) device, leveraging the known benefits of proxies for such distribution challenges. The difference between "software updates" and "policies that affect how software operates" would be considered a mere design choice or minor variation by a PHOSITA, as updates inherently change software operation, often in accordance with administrative directives.