Invalidity dossier
US 9264968
Device to device communications with carrier aggregation
Current assignee: Apple Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 2:46:56 PM
Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash
Patent summary
Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.
Patent Overview — US 9,264,968 B2
Title: "Device to device communications with carrier aggregation"
Assignee: Apple Inc. (original assignee and current assignee per the source; listed assignees may be inaccurate).
Inventor(s): Tarik Tabet, Ajoy K. Singh, Dawei Zhang.
Key dates (as listed):
- Priority date: 2013-12-03 (assumed, not a legal conclusion)
- Filing date: 2013-12-03
- Publication of US20150156693A1: 2015-06-04
- Granted/publication date: 2016-02-16
- Legal status: Active, adjusted expiration 2034-05-01 (assumed)
- Application number: US 14/095,292
Purpose and plain-language scope:
The patent relates to wireless devices and, more particularly, to using carrier aggregation for device-to-device (D2D) communications. In the described approach, a wireless device communicates with a base station according to a radio access technology such as LTE to establish a primary cell, which may carry control and data communications. The base station may then arrange with the wireless devices to establish a secondary cell used for device-to-device communication between the wireless devices.
The secondary cell may use a different channel than the primary cell, and may be on an entirely different frequency band. While the primary cell might use a licensed (e.g., LTE) frequency band, the secondary cell might be established on a channel of an unlicensed (e.g., ISM) band, or on another licensed band (e.g., for a 2G or 3G cellular technology). Figure 7 is described as a signal flow diagram of an exemplary method for D2D communication using carrier aggregation; Figure 5 illustrates an exemplary carrier aggregation scheme and Figure 6 an exemplary cross-carrier scheduling scheme.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9264968/en
What the excerpt does not establish:
The excerpt is partial — claim text, the full specification, and dependent-claim details are omitted, so exact claim scope cannot be confirmed. It does not establish litigation, ownership transfers, validity, or prior art, and it does not provide a legal analysis of the listed dates or legal status.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:51:57 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 9264968. 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.
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.
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.
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.
Prior art
Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.
Obviousness
Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.
Extensions
Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.
Derivative works
Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.