Invalidity dossier

US 8784113

Added 5/29/2026, 6:00:50 AM

Got a demand letter citing US 8784113?

Paste the full letter into the analyzer. We extract every asserted patent (this one and any others), characterize the asserter, flag validity vulnerabilities, and draft a sample response letter your attorney can adapt.

Analyze a letter →

Generic sample response letter (PDF)

Generates a draft reply letter to a generic infringement claim citing this patent, using the analysis below. For a response tailored to a specific letter you received, use the demand letter analyzer instead. Sample only — not legal advice. Do not send without review by a licensed patent attorney.

Download sample PDF →

Watchlist

Get alerted when this patent moves.

Email-only, free, anonymous. We'll notify you when US 8784113 gets a new lawsuit, a new PTAB proceeding, or a new dossier section. One-click unsubscribe from any alert.

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash

Patent summary

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

✓ Generated

US patent 8784113, titled "Open and interactive e-learning system and method," was issued to its current assignee, OPENSESAME Inc. The patent was filed on June 9, 2011, and granted on July 22, 2014. The inventors are Aaron H Bridges, Jason S Day, Joshua D Blank, and Donald S Spear.

Abstract:
The patent describes a system and method that facilitate widespread and easy access by learners to e-learning content created by authors, thereby fostering an e-learning marketplace. Content is centrally stored and updated, then distributed to local content servers via a content delivery network (CDN). A proprietary server provides interfaces and a "SESAMESEED" proxy that can be loaded into a user's server, which is connected to one or more Learning Management Systems (LMSs). Training managers can subscribe to content, authors receive payment, and learners participate in courses. The system tracks completion status and grades, which are reportable to the LMSs. The invention also provides security and enables interaction among various users.

Plain-language overview of independent claims:

  • Claim 1: E-learning Delivery System
    This claim describes a system for delivering e-learning content. It includes a central server for managing licenses and reporting user activity, and a content player that delivers content from a content delivery network (CDN). A crucial component is a "proxy" software module, initially stored on the network but executed on a user's device. This proxy is configured to identify specific licensed content, allow a user to access and interact with that content through a web browser, and report the user's progress and interaction status back to both the central licensing/reporting server and the user's local Learning Management System (LMS). When a user requests content, the proxy asks the central server to verify the user's license. If the license is valid, the server provides the proxy with information to access the content player, which the proxy then uses to instruct the user's browser. The proxy also relays information about the content playback status to the client-side LMS.

  • Claim 5: Method for Delivering E-learning Content
    This claim outlines a method for delivering e-learning content that complies with industry standards. The method begins by receiving a request from a user's Learning Management System (LMS) to access content located on a Content Delivery Network (CDN). The claim then continues to describe "configuring a proxy with license..." [The provided patent text for claim 5 is truncated, leading to uncertainty regarding its full scope].

USPTO and CAFC Docket Search Results (as of April 26, 2026):

The USPTO provides a Patent Public Search tool to search its database of patents and patent application publications.

Regarding litigation concerning US8784113, the Federal Circuit recently vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision. The PTAB had found that Go1 Pty, Ltd. failed to prove the challenged claims of US Patent No. 8,784,113 unpatentable as obvious. The Federal Circuit's decision, issued on Thursday (May 28, 2026), found that the Board's finding that expert testimony on step sequencing was conclusory was not supported by substantial evidence.

Generated 5/29/2026, 6:01:03 AM