Invalidity dossier

US 8802328

Method of producing a shaped part

Current assignee: Plansee SE

Added 10/27/2026, 12:00:25 AM

At a glanceActive PTAB challengeNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

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

✓ Generated

Patent Overview — US8802328B2

Title: Method of producing a shaped part
Assignee: Plansee SE (original and current assignee, per the source)
Inventors: Marco Brandner, Stefan Gerzoskovitz, Wolfgang Kraussler, Alexander Leuprecht, Andreas Venskutonis
Priority date: 2009-12-15
Application: US14/204,500, filed 2014-03-11
Published (US20140193287A1): 2014-07-10
Granted / published as US8802328B2: 2014-08-12
Anticipated expiration: 2030-12-15
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US8802328](/patent/US8802328)/en

Purpose
The patent concerns powder-metallurgy shaped parts made by pressing and sintering a pulverulent starting material, particularly interconnectors and end plates for fuel cell stacks (including SOFC stacks). These parts act as current collectors, separate anode and cathode reaction gases, and channel the reaction gases. They are thin plates (in practice 1–5 mm) bearing knob-like and/or ridge-like elevations. The excerpt notes that high-chromium alloys used for such parts are brittle and hard to press, and that pressing must yield high sealing and density.

Plain-language scope
The shaping is defined by geometry of the elevations: a radius R (or R′) of 0.15–1 mm at the transition, and a height h set so the ratio R:h (or R′:h) is 0.25–1. Embodiments narrow these to preferred and more preferred ranges (for example radius 0.3–1 mm and ratio 0.5–1, or 0.7–1), and include an incline angle α (or α′) of 95°–120° (preferred 95°–110°). The excerpt states that outside these limits density and homogeneity drop markedly, so single-stage pressing is no longer assured. Example materials include alloys with at least 20 wt% chromium, such as 20–30 wt% Cr with 70–80 wt% of an iron prealloy containing 0.5–0.8 wt% rare earths (e.g., yttrium), or 95 wt% Cr with 5 wt% of such an iron prealloy. FEM (Drucker–Prager Cap) simulations and a comparison table are described, but the excerpt is truncated mid-sentence.

What the excerpt does not establish
It does not give the full claims, complete description, or full numerical results; the text ends mid-sentence. It does not cover prosecution history, validity, ownership transfers, or litigation, which were excluded from research per instructions.

Generated 10/27/2026, 12:00:48 AM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8802328. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

No cases on file mention this patent. Upload a CSV or add a case manually in Admin → Manage litigation cases.

Litigation summary

Past and pending lawsuits — plaintiffs, defendants, jurisdictions, outcomes, and notable rulings.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Proceedings on file (1)

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.

1 active
Pending
Filed
Oct 26, 2026
Last modified
Oct 26, 2026
Petitioner
Bloom Energy Corp.
Inventor
MARCO BRANDNER et al

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Assignment history

Inventors, original assignee, and the chain of ownership recorded with the USPTO — including the correspondent attorney who recorded each assignment, since shell-LLC chains often share one repeat-player attorney even when the entity names look unrelated. Surfaces NPE / patent-troll patterns: shell-entity transfers, known asserters in the chain, repeat correspondent fingerprints, pre-litigation assignments, and bankruptcy fire-sales.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.