Assignment history

Inventors

• Eric M. DeLangis (Individual, Original Assignee)

Original assignee

The original assignee listed on the patent is "Individual." Since the patent abstract and description refer extensively to a "Residential Communications Gateway (RCG)" device and "Competitive Access Systems Inc," it is highly probable that Eric M. DeLangis, the inventor, was the individual who initially held the patent and was likely associated with Competitive Access Systems Inc.

Based on the patent text, Competitive Access Systems Inc. appears to have been an operating company focused on providing telecommunications services through the RCG device. The patent describes the RCG as a "broadband communications device that combines all voice, data and video communications... for transmission over a single, or a plurality of Plain Old Telephone Service (POTS) lines separately or in conjunction with, a wireless broadband backbone." The company's primary line of business, as described, was to enable Competitive Local Exchange Companies (CLECs) to offer advanced voice and data services over existing POTS lines without requiring expensive infrastructure enhancements.

Regarding its current status, the legal status of US8861349B2 is listed as "Expired - Lifetime" on Google Patents as of today's date, 2026-05-21. This suggests the patent is no longer in force. The "Current Assignee" is listed as Competitive Access Systems Inc.

Assignment timeline

To reconstruct the full assignment record for US patent 8861349, I would typically search the USPTO Assignment Center directly using the patent number. However, the provided patent text from Google Patents includes assignment information.

According to the "Legal status" section of US8861349B2 on Google Patents, the following assignment event is listed:

• 2021-05-13 - Assigned to COMPETITIVE ACCESS SYSTEMS, INC.
  • Conveyance: Reassignment
  • Assignor: DELANGIS, ERIC
  • Assignee: COMPETITIVE ACCESS SYSTEMS, INC.
  • Context: Assignment of assignor's interest (see document for details).

The Google Patents page also lists "Individual" as the "Original Assignee" and "Competitive Access Systems Inc" as the "Current Assignee". This indicates that the patent was initially held by the inventor, Eric M. DeLangis, and later assigned to Competitive Access Systems, Inc.

No other assignments are explicitly detailed in the provided Google Patents text. I cannot perform a live search of the USPTO Assignment Center at this moment, but based on the provided text, this is the complete assignment timeline available to me.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8861349
    2012 : Filed by Individual (Eric M. DeLangis)
    2014 : Application granted; Patent issued
    2021 : Assigned to Competitive Access Systems Inc
    2023 : Anticipated expiration (then expired)

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Unclear. While Competitive Access Systems Inc. is the assignee, the provided information does not offer enough detail to definitively determine if it operates as a shell entity for licensing only, or if it continues to be an operating company. The patent describes the RCG device and its purpose for CLECs, suggesting an operating business, but its current operational status is not fully detailed beyond being the "Current Assignee" of an "Expired - Lifetime" patent.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. Competitive Access Systems Inc. is not identified as a known NPE/asserter from the provided lists.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Unclear. The provided patent text does not include correspondent information (attorney name, firm, address) for the assignment.

4. Cascading transfers — Not present. Only one assignment is explicitly listed in the provided information: from Eric M. DeLangis to Competitive Access Systems Inc.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. The assignment to Competitive Access Systems Inc. occurred on 2021-05-13. The various litigation cases listed, such as 4:25-cv-00886 and 4:25-cv-00948, have 2025 filing dates. This gap (2021 assignment, 2025 litigation filings) suggests the assignment was not immediately preceding the litigation. However, without the precise filing dates for all cases and a definitive "first infringement suit," it's hard to be certain.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no indication in the provided patent text that the original assignee filed for bankruptcy.

7. Privateering — Unclear. No information is provided to suggest an operating company transferred the patent to an NPE to assert on its behalf.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The chain does not terminate at any known defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — insufficient data.

The available data only explicitly details one assignment from the individual inventor to Competitive Access Systems, Inc. While the patent has expired, and there are multiple litigation instances, there is insufficient information to confidently identify Competitive Access Systems, Inc. as a shell entity or a known patent asserter, nor are there other strong troll-pattern signals present in the limited assignment record provided. Further investigation into the nature of "Competitive Access Systems, Inc." and the specifics of the litigation (plaintiffs and defendants) would be required for a more definitive conclusion. The assignment information is available on the Google Patents page under "Legal status".