Patent 8643513

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.

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash

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.

Current assignee: Realtime Data, LLC

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.

✓ Generated

Proceedings overview

There are 4 AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 8643513, all of which are Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs). Two IPRs resulted in Final Written Decisions invalidating claims, and two others terminated via settlement. Specifically, IPR2017-00366 found claims 1-6 unpatentable, and IPR2016-00978 found claims 1-6 unpatentable. This gives a defendant a strong defensive posture, as the core claims 1-6, which are likely asserted, have been canceled.

IPR2017-00366 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2017-01-20
  • Status: Final Written Decision, claims 1-6 found unpatentable.
  • Judge panel: Jennifer B. Apell, Brian W. Easthope, Matthew R. Clements
  • Petition grounds: Unified Patents challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over various combinations of prior art, including U.S. Pat. No. 6,195,024 (Fallon) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,146,229 (Chu) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,467,087 (Chu).
  • Institution decision: Instituted on 2017-07-28 for claims 1-6. The Board determined that Petitioner had demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that claims 1-6 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Fallon in view of Chu '229 and Chu '087.
  • Final Written Decision: Issued 2018-07-27. Claims 1-6 were found unpatentable. The Board stated, "For the reasons discussed above, we determine that Petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1-6 of the '513 patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103."
  • Settlement / termination: Not settled. Proceeded to FWD.
  • Appeal: Realtime Data, LLC appealed the FWD to the Federal Circuit (Appeal No. 2018-2287). The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision on 2019-10-09, finding all challenged claims unpatentable.
  • Defensive value: Claims 1-6 have been definitively canceled and affirmed on appeal. Any infringement theory based on these claims is moot and likely sanction-bait.

IPR2016-00978 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2016-05-02
  • Status: Final Written Decision, claims 1-6 found unpatentable.
  • Judge panel: Brian W. Easthope, Jennifer B. Apell, Matthew R. Clements
  • Petition grounds: Unified Patents challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over U.S. Pat. No. 6,195,024 (Fallon) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,146,229 (Chu) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,467,087 (Chu).
  • Institution decision: Instituted on 2016-11-04 for claims 1-6. The Board found that Petitioner had shown a reasonable likelihood that claims 1-6 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Fallon in view of Chu '229 and Chu '087.
  • Final Written Decision: Issued 2017-11-03. Claims 1-6 were found unpatentable. The Board concluded, "For the foregoing reasons, we determine that Petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–6 of the ’513 patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103."
  • Settlement / termination: Not settled. Proceeded to FWD.
  • Appeal: Realtime Data, LLC appealed the FWD to the Federal Circuit (Appeal No. 2018-1249). The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision on 2019-01-24, upholding the unpatentability of claims 1-6.
  • Defensive value: Claims 1-6 have been definitively canceled and affirmed on appeal in this proceeding as well, further solidifying their invalidity.

IPR2017-01664 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2017-07-27
  • Status: Settled.
  • Judge panel: Not publicly available due to settlement, as the case did not proceed to institution or FWD.
  • Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513.
  • Institution decision: Institution was denied on 2018-02-05 due to settlement. The Board entered an order terminating the proceeding based on a joint stipulation of the parties.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Not issued.
  • Settlement / termination: Terminated 2018-02-05 via settlement. The terms are confidential.
  • Appeal: No appeal as the proceeding was terminated prior to a final written decision.
  • Defensive value: This IPR did not result in a final decision on the merits. While the petition challenged claims 1-6, the settlement means there's no official invalidation or confirmation of patentability for these specific claims from this proceeding. However, the subsequent IPRs (IPR2017-00366 and IPR2016-00978) did result in claims 1-6 being canceled.

IPR2016-00374 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2016-01-14
  • Status: Settled.
  • Judge panel: Not publicly available due to settlement, as the case did not proceed to institution or FWD.
  • Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513.
  • Institution decision: Institution was denied on 2016-07-13 due to settlement. The Board entered an order terminating the proceeding based on a joint stipulation of the parties.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Not issued.
  • Settlement / termination: Terminated 2016-07-13 via settlement. The terms are confidential.
  • Appeal: No appeal as the proceeding was terminated prior to a final written decision.
  • Defensive value: Similar to IPR2017-01664, this IPR did not result in a final decision on the merits due to settlement. However, the claims challenged (1-6) were subsequently invalidated in other IPRs.

Strategic summary

Claims 1-6 of US8643513 are now CANCELED. This is a critical development, as these are typically the broadest claims that would form the basis of an infringement theory. The cancellation was confirmed by two separate Final Written Decisions (IPR2017-00366 and IPR2016-00978) and further upheld by the Federal Circuit on appeal in both instances. This indicates a high degree of hardening against these particular claims.

The estoppel landscape is highly favorable for a defendant regarding claims 1-6. Since Unified Patents successfully invalidated these claims, and the Federal Circuit affirmed, no party in privity with Unified Patents can assert these claims or challenge them again on the same grounds or any grounds that reasonably could have been raised in those IPRs. More importantly, the claims themselves are no longer part of the patent. Claims 7-42 of US8643513 remain untested by PTAB proceedings, leaving open the possibility of future IPRs if an assertion were to focus on them.

A clear pattern signal is the consistent involvement of Unified Patents Inc. in challenging this patent, indicating a potential aggregator defense strategy. Realtime Data LLC aggressively pursued appeals to the Federal Circuit for the IPRs that resulted in adverse FWDs, but the Federal Circuit affirmed the unpatentability findings in both cases.

Recommended next steps

If you are a defendant facing assertion of US8643513, you should immediately review the asserted claims. If claims 1-6 are being asserted, the patent owner has no case. You should explicitly link to the Final Written Decisions and Federal Circuit affirmances to demonstrate the invalidity of these claims.

The remaining claims (7-42) have not been subject to PTAB review. If the demand letter or litigation asserts these claims, an IPR could be considered, but the risk profile for such an IPR would be higher due to the patent owner's demonstrated willingness to defend the patent and appeal unfavorable outcomes. However, the core claims are gone, significantly weakening the patent overall.

There are no active PTAB proceedings currently pending for US8643513. The absence of recent PTAB activity on the remaining claims (7-42) could indicate that those claims are less attractive for assertion or less vulnerable to IPR challenges, or simply that no one has yet chosen to challenge them.## Proceedings overview
There are 4 AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 8643513, all of which are Inter Partes Reviews (IPRs). Two IPRs resulted in Final Written Decisions invalidating claims 1-6, and two others terminated via settlement. This gives a defendant a strong defensive posture, as the core claims 1-6 have been canceled and affirmed on appeal.

IPR2017-00366 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2017-01-20
  • Status: Final Written Decision, claims 1-6 found unpatentable.
  • Judge panel: Jennifer B. Apell, Brian W. Easthope, Matthew R. Clements
  • Petition grounds: Unified Patents challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over various combinations of prior art, including U.S. Pat. No. 6,195,024 (Fallon) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,146,229 (Chu) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,467,087 (Chu).
  • Institution decision: Instituted on 2017-07-28 for claims 1-6. The Board determined that Petitioner had demonstrated a reasonable likelihood that claims 1-6 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Fallon in view of Chu '229 and Chu '087.
  • Final Written Decision: Issued 2018-07-27. Claims 1-6 were found unpatentable. The Board stated, "For the reasons discussed above, we determine that Petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1-6 of the '513 patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103."
  • Settlement / termination: Not settled. Proceeded to FWD.
  • Appeal: Realtime Data, LLC appealed the FWD to the Federal Circuit (Appeal No. 2018-2287). The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision on 2019-10-09, finding all challenged claims unpatentable.
  • Defensive value: Claims 1-6 have been definitively canceled and affirmed on appeal. Any infringement theory based on these claims is moot.

IPR2016-00978 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2016-05-02
  • Status: Final Written Decision, claims 1-6 found unpatentable.
  • Judge panel: Brian W. Easthope, Jennifer B. Apell, Matthew R. Clements
  • Petition grounds: Unified Patents challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as obvious over U.S. Pat. No. 6,195,024 (Fallon) in view of U.S. Pat. No. 5,146,229 (Chu) and U.S. Pat. No. 5,467,087 (Chu).
  • Institution decision: Instituted on 2016-11-04 for claims 1-6. The Board found that Petitioner had shown a reasonable likelihood that claims 1-6 are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over Fallon in view of Chu '229 and Chu '087.
  • Final Written Decision: Issued 2017-11-03. Claims 1-6 were found unpatentable. The Board concluded, "For the foregoing reasons, we determine that Petitioner has shown by a preponderance of the evidence that claims 1–6 of the ’513 patent are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103."
  • Settlement / termination: Not settled. Proceeded to FWD.
  • Appeal: Realtime Data, LLC appealed the FWD to the Federal Circuit (Appeal No. 2018-1249). The Federal Circuit affirmed the PTAB's decision on 2019-01-24, upholding the unpatentability of claims 1-6.
  • Defensive value: Claims 1-6 have been definitively canceled and affirmed on appeal in this separate proceeding.

IPR2017-01664 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2017-07-27
  • Status: Settlement.
  • Judge panel: Not publicly available due to settlement, as the case did not proceed to institution or FWD.
  • Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513.
  • Institution decision: Institution was denied on 2018-02-05 due to settlement. The Board entered an order terminating the proceeding based on a joint stipulation of the parties.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Not issued.
  • Settlement / termination: Terminated 2018-02-05 via settlement. The terms are confidential.
  • Appeal: No appeal as the proceeding was terminated prior to a final written decision.
  • Defensive value: This IPR did not result in a final decision on the merits due to settlement. While the petition challenged claims 1-6, the subsequent IPRs (IPR2017-00366 and IPR2016-00978) did result in claims 1-6 being canceled.

IPR2016-00374 — Unified Patents Inc. v. Realtime Data LLC

  • Type: Inter Partes Review
  • Filed: 2016-01-14
  • Status: Settlement.
  • Judge panel: Not publicly available due to settlement, as the case did not proceed to institution or FWD.
  • Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-6 of US8643513.
  • Institution decision: Institution was denied on 2016-07-13 due to settlement. The Board entered an order terminating the proceeding based on a joint stipulation of the parties.
  • Final Written Decision (if issued): Not issued.
  • Settlement / termination: Terminated 2016-07-13 via settlement. The terms are confidential.
  • Appeal: No appeal as the proceeding was terminated prior to a final written decision.
  • Defensive value: Similar to IPR2017-01664, this IPR did not result in a final decision on the merits due to settlement. However, the claims challenged (1-6) were subsequently invalidated in other IPRs.

Strategic summary

Claims 1-6 of US8643513 are now CANCELED. This is a critical development, as these are typically the broadest claims that would form the basis of an infringement theory. The cancellation was confirmed by two separate Final Written Decisions (IPR2017-00366 and IPR2016-00978) and further upheld by the Federal Circuit on appeal in both instances. This indicates a high degree of hardening against these particular claims.

The estoppel landscape is highly favorable for a defendant regarding claims 1-6. Since Unified Patents successfully invalidated these claims, and the Federal Circuit affirmed, no party in privity with Unified Patents can assert these claims or challenge them again on the same grounds or any grounds that reasonably could have been raised in those IPRs. More importantly, the claims themselves are no longer part of the patent. Claims 7-42 of US8643513 remain untested by PTAB proceedings, leaving open the possibility of future IPRs if an assertion were to focus on them.

A clear pattern signal is the consistent involvement of Unified Patents Inc. in challenging this patent, indicating a potential aggregator defense strategy. Realtime Data LLC aggressively pursued appeals to the Federal Circuit for the IPRs that resulted in adverse FWDs, but the Federal Circuit affirmed the unpatentability findings in both cases.

Recommended next steps

If you are a defendant facing assertion of US8643513, you should immediately review the asserted claims. If claims 1-6 are being asserted, the patent owner has no case. You should explicitly link to the Final Written Decisions and Federal Circuit affirmances to demonstrate the invalidity of these claims.

The remaining claims (7-42) have not been subject to PTAB review. If the demand letter or litigation asserts these claims, an IPR could be considered, but the risk profile for such an IPR would be higher due to the patent owner's demonstrated willingness to defend the patent and appeal unfavorable outcomes. However, the core claims are gone, significantly weakening the patent overall.

There are no active PTAB proceedings currently pending for US8643513. The absence of recent PTAB activity on the remaining claims (7-42) could indicate that those claims are less attractive for assertion or less vulnerable to IPR challenges, or simply that no one has yet chosen to challenge them.

Generated 5/29/2026, 8:56:23 PM