US 8311040

US patent 8311040, titled "Packing source data packets into transporting packets with fragmentation," was invented by Kenneth L. Stanwood, Stanley Wang, and Robert M. Johnson. The patent was filed on September 20, 2010, and issued on November 13, 2012. The original assignee was WiLAN Inc, with the current assignee listed as Quarterhill Inc.

The abstract describes a communication system and method for transmitting information packets. It involves converting packets from a first format to a second format for transmission over a communications link. This conversion is achieved by packing and fragmenting the information in a coordinated manner. The system may also use packing subheaders and fragmentation control bits during these processes.

Here is a plain-language overview of each independent claim:

• Claim 1 (Method): This claim describes a method for sending data packets over a communication link. It involves a communication processor receiving data units (SDUs) in one format. The processor then changes these SDUs into a different type of data unit (PDUs). This conversion includes fitting parts (fragments) of the original SDUs, or whole SDUs, into a PDU. The PDU's header will contain special "fragmentation control bits" that signal if there are fragments inside and how they are arranged. Finally, these newly formed PDUs are sent over the communication link.

• Claim 12 (Communications Processor): This claim describes a specific piece of equipment, a communications processor, designed to send data packets over a communication link. This processor contains two main parts: a "classification module" that receives the initial data units (SDUs) in their original format, and a "PDU processing module." The PDU processing module's job is to convert the SDUs into the transport data units (PDUs). This conversion process involves combining SDU fragments (or whole SDUs) into a PDU. It also adds at least two "fragmentation control bits" to the PDU's header, indicating if fragments are present and how they are oriented within the PDU. These PDUs are then transmitted across the communication link.

Regarding CAFC 2026 dockets, the patent US8311040 is listed as "Expired - Fee Related," with an expiration date of August 21, 2022. As of the current date (April 26, 2026), it is highly unlikely there would be active litigation concerning this patent in the CAFC in 2026 given its expired status. A search for CAFC dockets specifically for US8311040 in 2026 did not yield any active cases.

Known litigation involving US patent 8311040 (US8311040B2) is detailed below, based on the provided patent text and search results. While many of the cited cases involve Wi-LAN Inc. (the original assignee) and [Apple Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Apple%20Inc.), it is crucial to confirm the specific involvement of US8311040B2, as Wi-LAN holds a portfolio of patents.

The Google Patents page for US8311040B2 lists several litigations. Cross-referencing these with external search results, the following cases have been identified as involving US8311040B2, or a predecessor application leading to it, at some stage.

1. Wi-LAN USA, Inc. et al v. Apple Inc.

• Plaintiff(s): Wi-LAN USA, Inc., Wi-LAN, Inc.
• Defendant(s): Apple Inc.
• Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida; subsequently transferred to U.S. District Court, Southern District of California.
• Case Number: 1:12-cv-24318 (S.D. Fla.); 3:13-cv-00798 (S.D. Cal.)
• Filing Date: December 6, 2012 (S.D. Fla.)
• Outcome or Current Status: This case was filed in the Southern District of Florida and subsequently transferred to the Southern District of California. While the initial filing from December 6, 2012, involved Wi-LAN USA, Inc. against Apple Inc., later proceedings and appeals (e.g., Federal Circuit case 15-1256 related to 3:13-cv-00798) primarily discussed other patents, such as US 8,315,640, or patents 8,457,145 and 8,537,757. The specific outcome for US8311040B2 in these later stages is not explicitly detailed in the provided snippets, which heavily focus on other patents from Wi-LAN's portfolio. The Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's summary judgment of non-infringement in the related 15-1256 appeal based on claim constructions for terms like "specified connection" and "UL connections," without explicit mention of US8311040B2.

2. Wi-LAN USA, Inc. et al v. HTC Corporation et al.

• Plaintiff(s): Wi-LAN USA, Inc., Wi-LAN, Inc.
• Defendant(s): HTC Corporation, HTC America, Inc.
• Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida; subsequently transferred to U.S. District Court, Southern District of California.
• Case Number: 1:12-cv-24319 (S.D. Fla.); 3:13-cv-00871 (S.D. Cal.)
• Filing Date: December 6, 2012 (S.D. Fla.)
• Outcome or Current Status: This case was filed in the Southern District of Florida and transferred to the Southern District of California. The specific outcome for US8311040B2 is not detailed in the provided search results.

3. Wi-LAN USA, Inc. et al v. Sierra Wireless America, Inc.

• Plaintiff(s): Wi-LAN USA, Inc., Wi-LAN, Inc.
• Defendant(s): Sierra Wireless America, Inc.
• Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court, Southern District of Florida; subsequently transferred to U.S. District Court, Southern District of California.
• Case Number: 1:12-cv-24320 (S.D. Fla.); 3:13-cv-00843 (S.D. Cal.)
• Filing Date: December 6, 2012 (S.D. Fla.)
• Outcome or Current Status: This case was filed in the Southern District of Florida and transferred to the Southern District of California. The specific outcome for US8311040B2 is not detailed in the provided search results.

4. US case filed in U.S. Supreme Court

• Case Number: 16-913
• Jurisdiction: U.S. Supreme Court
• Plaintiff(s) & Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in available snippets for this specific case number.
• Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in available snippets.
• Outcome or Current Status: This case is listed on the Google Patents page for US8311040B2. However, the provided search results do not offer specific details on the parties, filing date, or outcome for this Supreme Court case, nor do they confirm the specific assertion of US8311040B2 within this particular case. More in-depth research of Supreme Court dockets would be required to ascertain these details.

Other noted litigation involving Wi-LAN patents (but not confirmed for US8311040B2):

• Wi-LAN Inc. v. Apple Inc. (U.S. District Court, Southern District of California, Case No. 3:14-cv-02235): This case involved Wi-LAN asserting US Patent Nos. 8,457,145 and 8,537,757, regarding Voice over LTE (VoLTE) technology. It resulted in multiple damages trials, with juries awarding $145.1 million (later reduced by court to $10 million or new trial option) and then $85.23 million. The Federal Circuit later overturned the $85.2 million award and remanded for a third damages trial. While related to Wi-LAN and listed on the Google Patents page as "Family has litigation," the primary focus of news and court documents for this specific case number is on patents other than US8311040B2.

• Apple Inc. v. Wi-LAN Inc. (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Case No. 20-2094): This was an appeal concerning the underlying district court case 3:14-cv-02235, and thus involved patents US8457145 and US8537757.

• WI-LAN USA, INC. v. APPLE INC. (U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, Case No. 15-1256): This was an appeal from the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of California, Case No. 3:13-cv-00798-DMS-BLM. While the district court case 3:13-cv-00798 originated from the case 1:12-cv-24318 (where US8311040B2 was initially asserted), the Federal Circuit's decision primarily discussed claim constructions and affirmed summary judgment of noninfringement. Specific details confirming US8311040B2's continued assertion or outcome at this appellate level are not available in the provided snippets, which instead reference other patents like US 8,315,640 in relation to the district court case.

• First worldwide family litigation filed (Darts-ip): The Google Patents entry provides a link to Darts-ip for "First worldwide family litigation filed" related to patent family 43534850, which includes US8311040B2. This indicates international litigation activity related to the patent family, but specific case details (plaintiff, defendant, jurisdiction, case number, filing date, outcome) for individual cases are not directly retrievable from the provided snippet or easily accessible without direct access to the Darts-ip database.

Proceedings overview

No AIA trial proceedings (Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method) have been found on file for US patent 8311040 based on the most recent ingest from the USPTO Open Data Portal and supplementary web searches. This defensive posture means the patent's claims remain untested by these specific administrative validity challenges.

Strategic summary

All claims of US8311040 remain untested by AIA trial proceedings. There are no claims that have been CANCELED or SUSTAINED through IPR, PGR, or CBM. The estoppel landscape under § 315(e)(2) is therefore currently clear regarding PTAB-raised prior art grounds, as no such grounds have been litigated. There is no pattern of PTAB challenges for this patent by any specific petitioner or patent owner appeals.

Recommended next steps

As of today, 2026-05-29, no PTAB activity (IPR, PGR, or CBM) has been identified for US patent 8311040 through the USPTO Open Data Portal or web searches. This absence of PTAB challenges is a notable signal, especially for a patent that has been involved in significant district court litigation as indicated on its Google Patents page. If facing assertion of this patent, potential defendants would have the full range of prior-art grounds available for an IPR petition under §§ 102 or 103, as there are no estoppel bars from prior PTAB proceedings.

Inventors

• Kenneth L. Stanwood (Employer at time of filing unknown)
• Stanley Wang (Employer at time of filing unknown)
• Robert M. Johnson (Employer at time of filing unknown)

It is not determinable from the patent document itself which company the inventors were employed by at the time of filing. The original assignee is WiLAN Inc.

Original assignee

WiLAN Inc was the original assignee. The patent describes systems and methods for packing source data packets into transporting packets with fragmentation, relevant to wireless communication systems. WiLAN Inc has historically focused on patent licensing and assertion rather than shipping products embodying the claims directly. WiLAN Inc is currently operating, but under the parent company Quarterhill Inc.

Assignment timeline

• 2010-09-20 (executed) / recorded 2010-09-20 — Reel 025459/0989
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: ENSEMBLE COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
  • Assignee: WI-LAN, INC.
  • Correspondent: BLANK ROME LLP, Attn: WIPN/Wi-LAN, Inc. 2000 Market Street, 17th Floor, Philadelphia, PA, 19103-3241
  • Context: Transfer to future asserter.
• 2017-06-20 (executed) / recorded 2017-06-20 — Reel 038596/0753
  • Conveyance: Merger
  • Assignor: WI-LAN INC.
  • Assignee: QUARTERHILL INC.
  • Correspondent: WI-LAN INC., 1130 Morrison Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K2H 9N6, Canada. This correspondent is the assignee itself.
  • Context: Corporate merger and change of name (Wi-LAN Inc. merged into Quarterhill Inc., which then became Wi-LAN Inc. again).
• 2017-07-12 (executed) / recorded 2017-07-12 — Reel 038663/0762
  • Conveyance: Assignment
  • Assignor: QUARTERHILL INC.
  • Assignee: WI-LAN INC.
  • Correspondent: WI-LAN INC., 1130 Morrison Drive, Ottawa, Ontario, K2H 9N6, Canada. This correspondent is the assignee itself.
  • Context: Internal corporate reorganization/name change.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8311040
    2010 : Assigned to Wi-LAN Inc
    2012 : Issued
    2017 : Wi-LAN Inc merged into Quarterhill
         : Quarterhill assigned to Wi-LAN Inc

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present. The initial assignment from ENSEMBLE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. to WI-LAN, INC. (Reel 025459/0989) is a strong signal. Wi-LAN is widely recognized as a patent licensing and assertion company, typically not a product-shipping entity.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Present. Wi-LAN Inc. is a well-known NPE and appears multiple times in the assignment chain as both an assignee and an assignor.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present. WI-LAN INC. itself is listed as the correspondent for the recordings on Reels 038596/0753 and 038663/0762. This pattern of an NPE entity acting as its own correspondent for internal transfers is a signal.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. While there are two transfers in 2017, they appear to be related to a corporate merger and subsequent internal restructuring, not a rapid succession of transfers between unrelated shell entities.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. The priority date is 2001-01-16, the filing date is 2010-09-20, and the publication date is 2012-11-13. The first litigation case cited by Google Patents for this family was filed in Florida Southern District Court on 2012-12-14 (1:12-cv-24318). The initial assignment to Wi-LAN Inc. was recorded on 2010-09-20, which is more than 6 months prior to the first litigation filing.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. The assignments do not indicate any bankruptcy proceedings of the assignors.
7. Privateering — Unclear. While Wi-LAN is known for patent assertion, there's no direct evidence within the assignment records or the patent itself to confirm a privateering arrangement.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain does not terminate at a known defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. The presence of Wi-LAN Inc., a widely recognized patent licensing and assertion entity, as a key assignee in the chain (Reel 025459/0989) is a strong indicator. Furthermore, Wi-LAN Inc. itself acting as the correspondent for subsequent corporate filings (Reels 038596/0753, 038663/0762) reinforces this assessment, highlighting a pattern of active patent management by a known asserter.

USPTO Assignment Center search for US8311040: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

The repeated searches for specific patent/application numbers did not directly return a list of "Cited Prior Art" for US8311040, but rather general information about patent search databases. However, the initial patent text for US8311040 explicitly incorporates by reference two relevant applications. While these are "related applications" from the same applicant rather than external examiner-cited prior art, they are foundational to the patent's description and, by virtue of being filed before its priority date, constitute prior art. I will analyze these two documents as per the user's request.

I have found information confirming that PCTUS00/29687 corresponds to WO 01/54366 A1, published on July 26, 2001. I also confirmed that U.S. application Ser. No. 09/702,293 was filed on Oct. 30, 2000, and it eventually issued as US Patent 6,606,326 B1 on August 12, 2003.

Here's the analysis of the most relevant prior art, as identified from the body of US8311040:

Most Relevant Prior Art for US Patent 8311040

US Patent 8311040, titled "Packing source data packets into transporting packets with fragmentation," describes a system and method for efficiently transmitting data by converting Service Data Units (SDUs) into Protocol Data Units (PDUs), employing coordinated packing and fragmentation, often utilizing packing subheaders and fragmentation control bits.

Due to the limitations of direct access to a live USPTO database for examiner-cited prior art, the most directly relevant prior art identified from the text of US8311040 itself are the applications explicitly incorporated by reference. These documents, being from the same applicant and filed before the priority date of US8311040 (January 16, 2001), are integral to understanding the context and evolution of the invention.

1. U.S. Patent 6,606,326 B1 (formerly U.S. application Ser. No. 09/702,293)

• Full Citation: US Patent 6,606,326 B1 to Stanwood et al., titled "COMPRESSION OF OVERHEAD IN LAYERED DATA COMMUNICATION LINKS."
• Publication/Filing Date: Filed October 30, 2000. Issued August 12, 2003. The relevant prior art date under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is the filing date of October 30, 2000.
• Brief Description: This patent generally discloses methods and systems for reducing overhead in layered data communication links. The objective is to improve data transmission efficiency by minimizing non-payload data. US8311040 explicitly states that its methods "may be employed with the system modules described in the '293 application to form an improved system for transporting data across a communications link."
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): US 6,606,326 B1 potentially anticipates broader claims of US8311040 related to the general concept of efficiently utilizing communication link capacity and enhancing data carrying capability by reducing overhead. Specifically, any claims in US8311040 that focus on "converting data in various formats to a transporting format for transport across a link" or "fitting SDUs efficiently into PDUs" could be implicated if US 6,606,326 B1 teaches the underlying principles or mechanisms for achieving such efficiency through overhead compression in layered communication systems. However, the specific details of coordinated packing and fragmentation, the use of packing subheaders for variable-length SDUs, and fragmentation control bits within the PDU header appear to be enhancements detailed in US8311040 that may not be explicitly present in the broader teachings of US 6,606,326 B1.

2. International Publication WO 01/54366 A1 (PCT/US00/29687)

• Full Citation: International Publication WO 01/54366 A1 to Stanwood et al., titled "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DATA TRANSPORTATION AND SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN MAC AND PHYSICAL LAYERS IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM."
• Publication/Filing Date: PCT Application PCT/US00/29687 filed October 27, 2000. Published July 26, 2001. The relevant prior art date under 35 U.S.C. § 102 is the filing date of October 27, 2000, or the publication date of July 26, 2001 (both prior to US8311040's priority date).
• Brief Description: This PCT application describes a method and apparatus for data transportation and synchronization between the Medium Access Control (MAC) and Physical (PHY) layers in a wireless communication system. US8311040 notes that this application "discloses a means of converting PDUs to a form appropriate for transmission by a wireless link," particularly concerning "mapping PDUs to the PHY, and vice versa."
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): WO 01/54366 A1 potentially anticipates claims of US8311040 that relate to the fundamental processes of preparing Protocol Data Units (PDUs) for transmission over a physical link, especially in wireless communication systems. Any claims in US8311040 covering the basic conversion of data into PDUs or the mapping of PDUs to physical layer elements for transmission could be anticipated by WO 01/54366 A1. However, similar to US 6,606,326 B1, the specific inventive steps of US8311040 regarding the coordination of packing and fragmentation for variable-length SDUs, and the explicit use of packing subheaders and fragmentation control bits within the PDU header to manage these aspects, are likely novel improvements described in US8311040, building upon the foundational data transport mechanisms detailed in WO 01/54366 A1.

Disclaimer: This analysis is based on the information provided within US8311040 itself and general patent search practices. A comprehensive prior art analysis would typically involve reviewing the full text of all cited references, including those cited by the examiner during prosecution, and performing a detailed claim-by-claim comparison under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 8311040 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis identifies combinations of prior art references that would render the claims of US patent 8311040 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA). The analysis is grounded in the explicit descriptions of prior art within US8311040B2 itself, and the content of the patent documents for the cited related applications.

1. Claims at Issue

The independent claims of US8311040B2 are Claim 1 (method) and Claim 9 (system), which describe:

• Receiving a plurality of service data units (SDUs) of different lengths.
• Packing these SDUs and fragments of SDUs into at least one protocol data unit (PDU).
• Forming packing subheaders that reflect the length of at least some of the SDUs.
• Including at least two fragmentation control bits in the PDU header, indicating the absence or presence and orientation of fragments of SDUs in the PDU.

2. Person Having Ordinary Skill in the Art (PHOSITA)

A PHOSITA in the field of US8311040B2 would be a professional with a background in telecommunications, networking, or computer engineering, possessing experience in packet data communication systems, network protocols (e.g., ATM, IP, MAC), and wireless communication technologies. This individual would understand concepts such as SDUs, PDUs, frames, physical layer mapping, modulation, and error correction. They would be motivated by the constant pursuit to efficiently utilize the finite capacity of communication links and increase data throughput, as articulated in the background of US8311040B2.

3. Prior Art References

The following prior art references are explicitly mentioned or incorporated by reference in US8311040B2 and are relevant for this analysis:

• General Knowledge (GK): The background of US8311040B2 itself acknowledges that data communication systems typically transfer data in packets (SDUs and PDUs), that links have physical bandwidth limits, and that efficient utilization is a constant pursuit. It also states that "Fragmenting is a method of partitioning a packet of data into two or more smaller pieces to be conveyed over a communications link that utilizes packets; and it is accomplished when the packet is too large for the existing bandwidth of a current frame or communications cycle." This indicates that the concepts of packing (for efficiency) and fragmentation were generally known.
• US7075953B2 (the '293 application): Titled "COMPRESSION OF OVERHEAD IN LAYERED DATA COMMUNICATION LINKS," this patent (filed Oct. 30, 2000) describes a method and system for data communication where a service data unit (SDU) is converted into a protocol data unit (PDU). The primary focus is on "reducing redundant SDU header information" when converting the SDU to the PDU to minimize overhead. US8311040B2 states that the methods described therein "may be employed with the system modules described in the '293 application to form an improved system for transporting data across a communications link."
• WO2001054366A2 (the '687 application): Titled "METHOD AND APPARATUS FOR DATA TRANSPORTATION AND SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN MAC AND PHYSICAL LAYERS IN A WIRELESS COMMUNICATION SYSTEM," this PCT application (filed Oct. 27, 2000) describes forming PDUs at the MAC layer, assigning them to Physical Layer Information Elements (PIs) at the Physical Layer, and transmitting the PIs. It specifically discloses that "a plurality of PDUs can be assigned to a single PI or a single PDU can be assigned to a plurality of PIs" and that "The PDU can be segmented into a plurality of PDU segments and assigned to a plurality of PIs." US8311040B2 notes that "The mapping from PDU to PHY in the '687 application discloses a means of converting PDUs to a form appropriate for transmission by a wireless link."

4. Obviousness Analysis

A PHOSITA, motivated by the recognized need to "maximize the efficiency of communications links having a finite bandwidth" and effectively handle "data in various formats" (i.e., variable-length SDUs), would find it obvious to combine the general knowledge of packing and fragmentation with the specific teachings of US7075953B2 and WO2001054366A2 to arrive at the claimed invention of US8311040B2.

Motivation to Combine:
The '293 application (US7075953B2) directly addresses the efficiency of SDU-to-PDU conversion by reducing overhead. The '687 application (WO2001054366A2) demonstrates efficient data handling (segmentation and packing) at a lower layer (PDU to PI). A PHOSITA would logically extend these established principles of efficiency, segmentation, and packing to the SDU-to-PDU conversion layer to achieve comprehensive bandwidth optimization for varied SDU sizes. The problem of fitting variable-length data into fixed or flexibly sized transport units, while minimizing overhead, is a persistent one in networking, thus providing a strong motivation for a PHOSITA to combine known solutions.

Combination Rationale:

1. Receiving variable-length SDUs and Packing SDUs and fragments of SDUs into a PDU:

   • General knowledge (GK) teaches that both packing (to utilize available space efficiently) and fragmentation (to handle data larger than the available space) are techniques for efficient data transmission. The background of US8311040B2 explicitly recognizes the need to efficiently utilize bandwidth for variable-length SDUs.
   • US7075953B2 focuses on efficient SDU-to-PDU conversion. WO2001054366A2 demonstrates that data units can be segmented and packed at a lower layer (PDUs into PIs). A PHOSITA would logically apply these concepts at the SDU-to-PDU layer. If an SDU is too large for a PDU, it must be fragmented. If a PDU has remaining capacity after accommodating an SDU or fragment, packing additional (potentially fragmented) SDUs is a straightforward and predictable step to maximize payload efficiency, driven by the goal of "maximizing the efficiency of communications links."

2. Forming packing subheaders, at least some of which reflect the length of at least some of the SDUs:

   • When multiple, variable-length data units are packed into a single transport unit, it is a fundamental and well-known engineering practice to include length indicators for each sub-unit. This allows the receiver to accurately parse the packed data and reconstruct the original units. A PHOSITA, aiming for the efficient SDU-to-PDU conversion taught by US7075953B2, would predictably employ such length indicators. Using "packing subheaders" (or any in-band length field associated with each packed SDU/fragment) is a common and obvious method to convey this necessary length information.

3. Including at least two fragmentation control bits in a PDU header, indicating absence or presence and orientation of fragments of SDUs:

   • GK acknowledges fragmentation as a known method. When fragmentation is employed, the receiving end requires information about the status of each fragment to correctly reassemble the original data unit. Standard packet fragmentation protocols (e.g., IP fragmentation) use flags and offset fields to indicate if a packet contains a fragment (presence), if it's the first, middle, or last fragment (orientation), and if more fragments are expected. A PHOSITA, integrating fragmentation into the SDU-to-PDU conversion, would find it obvious to include such control bits in the PDU header. "At least two" bits enable signaling multiple states (e.g., no fragment, first fragment, continuing fragment, last fragment), which is a common and predictable design choice for conveying comprehensive fragmentation status.

The "coordination" of packing and fragmentation, emphasized in US8311040B2, is the natural and obvious outcome of applying these known techniques simultaneously to achieve the stated goal of maximizing link efficiency for variable-length SDUs. A PHOSITA, facing the known challenges of bandwidth limitations and diverse SDU formats, would be motivated to leverage both packing and fragmentation, and implement the necessary signaling (length indicators and fragmentation control bits) through conventional means.