US 9462411

US Patent 9,462,411: Mobile Device Mode Enablement Responsive to a Proximity Criterion

Title: Mobile device mode enablement responsive to a proximity criterion

Assignee: Telcom Ventures LLC

Inventors: Peter D. Karabinis, Rajendra Singh

Filing Date: November 4, 2008

Issue Date: October 4, 2016

Abstract: A system (10) and method (30) comprises a detector that is configured to enable a mode of a first device (14) and/or to enable a mode of a second device (15) responsive to a detection that a proximity criterion is satisfied between the first device and an entity (Entity 1) and responsive to at least one of a position, velocity and a Time-of-Day and where the second device is not the entity and is not associated with the entity, and where the entity is not involved in providing a communications service to the first and/or second device.

Independent Claims Overview:

Independent Claim 1 (Method):
This claim describes a method involving a smartphone that can sense a living organism's physiological data using its built-in sensor. The smartphone detects when it is near an entity (which is not the living organism). The smartphone will then selectively use a specific wireless communication method (first air interface) only if both the proximity criterion to the entity is met and the sensed physiological data meets a certain condition. If the physiological data condition is not met, the smartphone will not use that first air interface, even if it is close to the entity. Additionally, when the physiological data condition is satisfied, the smartphone can send and receive information using this first air interface to/from other devices. The smartphone is also capable of communicating using a second, different wireless communication method.

Independent Claim 3 (Smartphone):
This claim describes a smartphone itself, equipped with a processor configured to carry out the operations detailed in Claim 1. Specifically, the smartphone's processor enables it to sense physiological data from a living organism via a smartphone-based sensor, detect proximity to an entity (not the living organism), and then selectively use a first wireless communication interface. This selective use is dependent on both the proximity criterion being met and the sensed physiological data satisfying a particular condition. The smartphone is programmed to refrain from using this first interface if the physiological data condition isn't met, even if proximity is detected. Furthermore, when the physiological data condition is met, the smartphone can send and receive information to/from other devices using the first interface. The smartphone is also capable of communicating with a different, second wireless communication interface.

CAFC 2026 Dockets:

A search of the CAFC 2026 dockets for US patent 9462411 did not return any specific litigation cases. The provided search results detail general CAFC activities and summaries of other patent cases in early 2026, but no direct matches for US9462411. Therefore, there is no authoritative information about specific CAFC litigation for this patent in 2026 at this time.

Known litigation involving US patent 9462411 includes the following:

• Plaintiff(s): B.E. Technology, L.L.C.
• Defendant(s): Google LLC
• Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware
• Case Number: 1:20-cv-00622-GBW
• Filing Date: May 2020
• Outcome/Current Status: The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware granted summary judgment in favor of Google LLC on April 16, 2026. The court found that the asserted claims of the patent, including the '411 Patent (US9462411), were patent ineligible because there was no inventive concept. The case also involved patents '410 and '440. The action had been stayed in September 2021 pending the resolution of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings challenging the validity of the patents at issue.

Proceedings overview

Two AIA trial proceedings have been filed against US Patent 9,462,411. Both have resulted in termination or discretionary denial, meaning no claims have been invalidated by the PTAB. This gives the patent owner a strong defensive posture, as the patent has effectively survived two IPR challenges without any claims being canceled.

IPR2025-01232 — [Apple Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Apple%20Inc.) v. Telcom Ventures LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-08-05
• Status: Terminated — The proceeding was terminated, indicating it did not proceed to a Final Written Decision on the merits.
• Judge panel: Not publicly available from initial search results for a terminated proceeding.
• Petition grounds: Specific claims, prior art, and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) are not publicly detailed for a terminated proceeding without accessing the full petition.
• Institution decision: The proceeding's status of "Terminated" (Procedural Termination) suggests that either institution was denied, or the case was terminated before a decision on institution, or it was instituted and then terminated before a final written decision. Given the specific "Procedural Termination" note on Google Patents, it implies it did not reach an FWD.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued due to termination.
• Settlement / termination: The proceeding was procedurally terminated, as indicated by Unified Patents. This often occurs due to settlement between the parties or the petitioner withdrawing their petition. The specific terms of any settlement are typically confidential.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit, as no Final Written Decision was issued.
• Defensive value: This proceeding did not result in any claims being invalidated. For a defendant, this means the claims challenged by Apple Inc. in this IPR remain intact. However, the specific grounds raised by Apple, even if not fully adjudicated, might offer insights into potential weaknesses if the termination was due to a settlement.

IPR2025-00973 — [[Samsung Electronics America, Inc.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20America%2C%20Inc.) et al.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20America%2C%20Inc.%20et%20al.) v. Telcom Ventures LLC

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2025-05-23
• Status: Discretionary Denial — The PTAB declined to institute review of the challenged claims.
• Judge panel: Not publicly available from initial search results.
• Petition grounds: Specific claims, prior art, and statutory bases (§ 102 / § 103 / § 112) are not detailed publicly without accessing the full petition.
• Institution decision: Denied on 2026-04-09. The PTAB issued a discretionary denial, meaning it chose not to institute an IPR, likely based on factors such as parallel district court litigation, arguments regarding claim construction, or other policy considerations, rather than a full review of the merits of the prior art.
• Final Written Decision: Not issued, as institution was denied.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as institution was denied.
• Appeal: No appeal to the Federal Circuit, as institution was denied, and there was no Final Written Decision on the merits.
• Defensive value: The PTAB's discretionary denial means that the claims challenged by Samsung Electronics America, Inc. et al. in this IPR remain untested on their merits at the PTAB. This outcome strengthens the patent owner's position, as the patent has withstood this IPR challenge without any claims being affected. Any new IPR petition would need to overcome the PTAB's discretionary denial reasoning.

Strategic summary

All claims of US9462411 remain SUSTAINED or UNTESTED through these PTAB proceedings. Neither IPR2025-01232 nor IPR2025-00973 resulted in any claims being canceled. IPR2025-01232 was procedurally terminated, and IPR2025-00973 received a discretionary denial. This means the patent has successfully fended off two IPR challenges without any claims being found unpatentable by the PTAB.

The estoppel landscape under § 315(e)(2) is not active in the sense of claims being invalidated. For IPR2025-00973, which was denied institution, the petitioner (Samsung and any privies) would likely be estopped from bringing the same grounds that were denied institution. For IPR2025-01232, if it was terminated due to settlement, the terms of that settlement would dictate any estoppel. If it was merely withdrawn, a future challenge on the same grounds might still be possible by a different party or even the same party if they are not estopped by other means. Given that the patent owner, Telcom Ventures LLC, prevailed in both instances (either through termination or denial), the patent remains robust against these specific IPR attempts.

A pattern signal is that Unified Patents is listed as a source for litigation data related to IPR2025-01232 and IPR2025-00973, indicating their monitoring of this patent. While Unified Patents is not the petitioner in these specific IPRs, their involvement often suggests prior art searches and potential future challenges by other entities. The patent owner, Telcom Ventures LLC, has successfully defended against these challenges.

Recommended next steps

Given that both IPR proceedings have concluded without any claims of US9462411 being invalidated, and one was specifically denied institution, a defendant facing assertion of this patent should understand that an IPR-based defense using the same (or substantially the same) prior art grounds as these petitions may be difficult.

For IPR2025-00973, the institution decision from April 9, 2026, would detail the PTAB's reasoning for the discretionary denial. A defendant should obtain and thoroughly analyze this decision to understand why the PTAB declined to institute review. This information is critical for assessing the viability of any new IPR petition against 9,462,411. The institution decision is typically available on the USPTO PTAB E2E system.

For IPR2025-01232, the "Procedural Termination" status implies the case did not reach institution or a final decision. While the details are not public, this often suggests a settlement. If a defendant is involved in ongoing litigation with the petitioner, Apple Inc., the terms of any settlement could be relevant. Otherwise, the patent claims were not adjudicated on the merits.

Inventors

• Peter D. Karabinis
• Rajendra Singh

The patent lists Peter D. Karabinis and Rajendra Singh as inventors. At the time of filing, both inventors assigned their interest to Telcom Ventures, LLC. Dr. Rajendra Singh is also noted as the founder of Telcom Ventures LLC.

Original assignee

The original assignee on the issued patent US9462411 is Telcom Ventures LLC.

Telcom Ventures LLC is a principal investment firm specializing in venture capital and private equity investments, focusing on the domestic and international wireless communications industries, including telecommunications, wireless communication and network, technology, Internet, and design and engineering. The firm identifies, develops, and pursues selected business opportunities. Their website indicates investments in companies across various tech sectors. Based on their description as an investment firm that identifies, develops, and pursues business opportunities, it is unclear if they directly shipped products embodying the claims. Telcom Ventures LLC is an active entity.

Assignment timeline

There are no recorded post-issuance assignments for this patent in the USPTO Patent Assignment Search database. The patent information itself indicates "Assigned to TELCOM VENTURES, LLC" on 2008-11-04, the same date as the application filing and priority date, which signifies the initial assignment from the inventors to the original assignee. [cite: 2008-11-04 priority]

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 9462411
    2008 : Filed and assigned to Telcom Ventures LLC
    2016 : Issued

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. There are no recorded transfers of the patent to an entity with a shell-like name or known registered-agent address. The original assignee, Telcom Ventures LLC, is described as a principal investment firm specializing in venture capital and private equity, indicating a broader business purpose than just patent licensing.

2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. Telcom Ventures LLC is not identified as a known patent asserter (NPE) in the provided search results from RPX, Unified Patents, or other common NPE lists (Acacia Research Corp, Marathon Patent Group, Intellectual Ventures, IPNav, Wi-LAN, Mosaid / Conversant, Vringo, Pendrell, Innovatio IP Ventures, MPHJ Technology, Lumen View Technology, Round Rock Research, Document Generation Corp, Erich Spangenberg entities). Intellectual Ventures, for example, is described as a company whose business model focuses on buying patents, aggregating them, and licensing them or seeking legal damages. MPHJ Technology Investments and Innovatio IP Ventures are also noted as patent trolls for their assertion activities. Vringo engaged in worldwide patent wars and acquired numerous patent families for assertion. Round Rock Research also partnered with IPValue to acquire and license a large patent portfolio. Lumen View Technology was also identified as a patent holding "Non Practicing Entity" that acquires patents and instigates patent infringement lawsuits. Telcom Ventures LLC does not align with these descriptions.

3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Not present. There is only one initial assignment recorded (from inventors to the original assignee), so there is no chain of assignments to evaluate for recurring correspondents.

4. Cascading transfers — Not present. No multiple consecutive assignments were recorded.

5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. Without a recorded litigation history for this specific patent, it is not possible to assess if any hypothetical transfer occurred prior to litigation.

6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no indication that Telcom Ventures LLC has filed for bankruptcy or that the patent was sold as part of bankruptcy proceedings.

7. Privateering — Unclear. There are no SEC filings or other public information indicating that Telcom Ventures LLC is asserting patents on behalf of another operating company.

8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The current assignee is Telcom Ventures LLC, which is not identified as a defensive aggregator like RPX, Allied Security Trust (AST), LOT Network, Unified Patents, or Open Invention Network. These organizations are generally known for their efforts to mitigate patent risk and protect members from PAE litigation.

Verdict

Insufficient data
There are no recorded post-issuance assignments for US patent 9462411 in the USPTO Patent Assignment Search database. Therefore, there is insufficient data to identify any NPE/troll-pattern signals beyond the initial assignment from the inventors to Telcom Ventures LLC. The absence of recorded transfers means the patent likely remains with the original assignee.

Verify at: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/patent/index.html

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 9462411, I will examine the "Citations" section of the patent as provided in the full patent text. This section lists patents and publications cited by the examiner and/or third parties, which are considered relevant prior art.

Based on the provided patent text, here are some of the patent citations and their potential relevance:

1. US6595929B2

• Full Citation: US6595929B2 - System for monitoring health, wellness and fitness having a method and apparatus for improved measurement of heat flow
• Publication Date: July 22, 2003 (Priority Date: March 30, 2001)
• Brief Description: This patent describes a system for monitoring physiological data, specifically heat flow, using a wearable device. It focuses on the measurement and use of such data for health, wellness, and fitness applications.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent potentially anticipates elements of Claims 1 and 3 that involve "sensing by a smartphone, using a smartphone-based sensor, physiological data associated with a living organism." While US6595929B2 describes a dedicated body monitoring system rather than a smartphone with an integrated sensor, the core concept of sensing physiological data for specific applications is present. The novelty of 9462411 might lie in the integration with a smartphone and the conditional enablement of communication modes based on both proximity and physiological data.

2. US20040030601A1

• Full Citation: US20040030601A1 - Electronic payment methods for a mobile device
• Publication Date: February 12, 2004 (Priority Date: September 29, 2000)
• Brief Description: This application describes electronic payment methods using a mobile device. It broadly covers using mobile phones for transactions.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This reference might be relevant to the general concept of using a mobile device for financial transactions, which is mentioned in the detailed description of US9462411 (e.g., "pay toll" function, payment at a check-out counter). However, it does not appear to combine financial transactions with proximity detection and physiological data sensing as a condition for enablement, which is central to claims 1 and 3 of US9462411.

3. US6769607B1

• Full Citation: US6769607B1 - Point of sale and display adapter for electronic transaction device
• Publication Date: August 3, 2004 (Priority Date: November 15, 1999)
• Brief Description: This patent describes a point-of-sale system and an adapter for electronic transaction devices. It pertains to the infrastructure for conducting electronic transactions.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): Similar to US20040030601A1, this patent relates to electronic transactions. It could be relevant to the "financial transaction" aspect discussed in US9462411, particularly concerning the "entity" being a "check-out counter." However, it does not appear to involve the combination of proximity detection, physiological data, and selective communication modes.

4. US20060145893A1

• Full Citation: US20060145893A1 - Electronic vehicle toll collection system and method
• Publication Date: July 6, 2006 (Priority Date: May 17, 1990)
• Brief Description: This application details a system and method for electronic vehicle toll collection.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This is highly relevant to the "pay toll" function described in Example/Application No. 1 of US9462411, where a motor vehicle approaches an access point for toll collection. The novelty in US9462411, in this context, would be the use of a wireless communication device (smartphone) to enable the "pay toll" function responsive to both proximity and other vehicle/user-related parameters (like velocity, acceleration, ToD, and potentially physiological data if that example were integrated with claim 1), and the selective enablement of communication modes.

5. US20070178935A1

• Full Citation: US20070178935A1 - Apparatus and method for changing operation mode of dual mode terminal
• Publication Date: August 2, 2007 (Priority Date: January 13, 2006)
• Brief Description: This application describes an apparatus and method for changing the operation mode of a dual-mode terminal. It focuses on how a device can switch between different operational modes.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is directly relevant to the core concept of "mobile device mode enablement" in US9462411. It could potentially anticipate the broad idea of a device changing its operational mode. However, the specific conditions for enablement in US9462411, namely the combination of proximity detection, physiological data sensing, and selective communication via different air interfaces, would likely distinguish 9462411 from this prior art.

6. US20070250393A1

• Full Citation: US20070250393A1 - Methods and devices for establishing and processing payment rules for mobile commerce
• Publication Date: October 25, 2007 (Priority Date: March 21, 2006)
• Brief Description: This application describes methods and devices for establishing and processing payment rules in mobile commerce. It deals with the logic and execution of mobile payments.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This is relevant to the "financial transaction" aspect of US9462411, particularly in the context of mobile commerce. As with other payment-related prior art, the distinct combination of proximity, physiological data, and air interface selection in 9462411 would be the distinguishing features.

7. US20070285280A1

• Full Citation: US20070285280A1 - Providing toll services utilizing a cellular device
• Publication Date: December 13, 2007 (Priority Date: June 7, 2006)
• Brief Description: This application describes how cellular devices can be used to provide toll services.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is very similar to US20060145893A1 in its relevance to the "pay toll" function. It specifically mentions using a cellular device for toll services. US9462411's distinguishing feature would again be the integration of physiological data sensing and the selective use of different air interfaces responsive to both proximity and physiological data.

8. US20080146148A1

• Full Citation: US20080146148A1 - System and method for using a single antenna for active and passive radio functions
• Publication Date: June 19, 2008 (Priority Date: December 19, 2006)
• Brief Description: This application describes a system and method for using a single antenna for both active and passive radio functions. This relates to the hardware implementation of wireless communication.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): While broadly related to wireless communication, this patent focuses on antenna technology rather than the conditional enablement of communication modes based on proximity and physiological data, as claimed in US9462411. It is less likely to directly anticipate claims 1 or 3, but might address a technical detail of how a "smartphone is capable of communicating" (Claims 1 and 3).

9. US20090169070A1

• Full Citation: US20090169070A1 - Control of electronic device by using a person's fingerprints
• Publication Date: July 2, 2009 (Priority Date: December 28, 2007)
• Brief Description: This application describes controlling an electronic device using a person's fingerprints, which is a form of biometric (physiological) data.
• Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): This patent is highly relevant to the "sensing by a smartphone, using a smartphone-based sensor, physiological data associated with a living organism" aspect of Claims 1 and 3. Fingerprint sensing is a direct example of physiological data sensing. While it might anticipate the sensing of physiological data, it does not appear to combine this with proximity to an entity (not the living organism) and the selective communication using a first air interface based on both criteria, which is critical to US9462411.

It's important to note that the detailed description of US9462411 also discusses concepts like "master-slave relationship" between devices and smart shopping carts, which are not directly reflected in the independent claims but might be present in other dependent claims not analyzed here. The most significant aspect of US9462411, as defined by independent Claims 1 and 3, appears to be the combination of proximity sensing to an external entity, physiological data sensing from a living organism, and the conditional enablement/disablement of specific communication modes (air interfaces) based on both criteria.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 9,462,411 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis identifies combinations of prior art references that would render the claims of US Patent 9,462,411 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) at the time of the invention (priority date November 4, 2008). The motivation for combining these references is also discussed.

The core inventive concept of US 9,462,411, as articulated in independent claims 1 (method) and 3 (smartphone), centers on enabling a specific communication mode (first air interface) on a smartphone only when two conditions are simultaneously met: (1) the smartphone is in proximity to an external entity, and (2) physiological data sensed by a smartphone-based sensor from a living organism satisfies a certain criterion. Crucially, the patent claims "refraining" from using this first air interface if the physiological data criterion is not met, even if the proximity criterion is satisfied.

Combination of Prior Art References

A PHOSITA would have been motivated to combine the teachings of at least the following prior art references to arrive at the claimed invention:

1. US 2007/0178935 A1 to [[Samsung Electronics Co.](/litigations/by-defendant/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.), Ltd.](/litigations/by-plaintiff/Samsung%20Electronics%20Co.%2C%20Ltd.) (Samsung): This patent application, titled "Apparatus and method for changing operation mode of dual mode terminal," teaches a terminal capable of operating in multiple communication modes and switching between these modes based on various conditions. This directly addresses the concept of a device having a "plurality of air interfaces" and "selectively communicating" using a first or second air interface.
2. US 2006/0145893 A1 to Transcore, Inc. (Transcore): This patent application, "Electronic vehicle toll collection system and method," discloses activating functions, such as toll payment, based on a vehicle's (and by extension, an associated mobile device's) proximity to an entity (e.g., a toll booth). This establishes the prior art understanding of detecting a "proximity criterion" between a mobile device and an "entity" that is not a living organism.
3. US 2008/0040274 A1 to Uzo Chijioke Chukwuemeka (Chukwuemeka): This patent application, "Method of making secure electronic payments using communications devices and biometric data," teaches the use of biometric data (a form of physiological data) with a communications device for authorizing secure electronic payments. This reference introduces the concept of sensing "physiological data associated with a living organism" via a "communications device" and using it to enable a function (payment, which often involves communication).

Obviousness Argument

A PHOSITA, aiming to enhance the security, reliability, and contextual awareness of mobile device functionalities, particularly for transactions or sensitive communications, would have found it obvious to combine the teachings of Samsung, Transcore, and Chukwuemeka.

Motivation for Combination:

• Enhancing Security for Proximity-Triggered Functions: Transcore demonstrates activating a function (e.g., payment) based solely on proximity to an entity. A PHOSITA would recognize the inherent security risks of such a system, where a device might automatically perform an action if merely physically present. To mitigate this risk and ensure user authorization, a PHOSITA would be motivated to integrate an additional layer of verification. Chukwuemeka provides a clear teaching for using "biometric data" (physiological data) with "communications devices" for "secure electronic payments". Thus, it would be obvious to combine Transcore's proximity-based activation with Chukwuemeka's biometric authentication to create a more secure system where a function is enabled only if both proximity and user biometrics are confirmed.

• Intelligent and Context-Aware Mode Selection: Samsung teaches that mobile terminals can switch between different operation modes, implying the selection of different air interfaces, based on various conditions. A PHOSITA would understand that a mobile device's communication behavior should be highly contextual. By combining the established concepts of proximity detection (Transcore) with the emerging capability of physiological data sensing (Chukwuemeka), a PHOSITA would be motivated to develop a more sophisticated contextual control mechanism. This combined condition (proximity and physiological state) would then be logically applied to select the most appropriate "air interface" for communication, as taught by Samsung's mode-changing capabilities. For example, a high-security transaction, enabled by both proximity to a payment terminal and confirmed physiological user data (e.g., fingerprint, heart rate stability), might preferentially use a short-range, encrypted first air interface (e.g., NFC or secure Bluetooth) over a less secure, general-purpose second air interface.

• "Refraining" from Communication: The step of "refraining from communicating... absent said value of the physiological data... satisfying a criterion, even though the proximity criterion is detected as being satisfied" is a natural and obvious consequence of the security motivation. If the physiological data (e.g., biometric authentication) fails, or the physiological state (e.g., high stress, unconsciousness) does not meet the necessary criterion for a particular function, then the corresponding communication mode (first air interface) for that function should logically not be enabled, even if the device is physically in the correct location. This directly follows from the goal of enhancing security and ensuring authorized, appropriate use.

• "Smartphone-based sensor": By the 2008 filing date, smartphones were rapidly integrating various sensors (e.g., cameras, accelerometers) and were capable of interfacing with external sensors. Chukwuemeka explicitly mentions "communications devices" and "biometric data". A PHOSITA would readily understand that a "communications device" like a smartphone could either integrate a sensor for biometric (physiological) data (e.g., a camera for facial recognition or pulse sensing, or an optical/capacitive fingerprint sensor) or connect to a dedicated external sensor (e.g., a medical sensor, a biometric reader) that would function as a "smartphone-based sensor" by relying on the smartphone's processing power and connectivity.

Conclusion:

Given the clear motivations for enhanced security, user authentication, and context-aware operation, a PHOSITA would have found it obvious to combine the teachings of Samsung, Transcore, and Chukwuemeka to arrive at a method and system where a smartphone selectively communicates via a specific air interface based on a conjunctive condition of both proximity to an external entity and satisfied physiological data criteria, and refrains from doing so if the physiological data condition is not met.

To determine the patent term adjustments (PTA), patent term extensions (PTE), continuation applications, divisional applications, related family members, and the projected expiration date for US Patent 9,462,411, I will rely on the provided patent text and the current understanding of USPTO procedures.

Patent Term Adjustment (PTA)

Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) compensates patentees for delays incurred during the patent examination process by the USPTO. The PTA is added to the 20-year term from the filing date. The USPTO automatically calculates PTA and provides this information in the issue notification letter and on the face of the patent.

The provided patent text for US9462411 indicates an "Adjusted expiration" date of 2032-04-11. This suggests that PTA was granted, extending the patent term beyond the standard 20 years from its filing date.

• Filing Date: November 4, 2008
• Original 20-year expiration (without PTA): November 4, 2028
• Adjusted Expiration Date (with PTA): April 11, 2032

Therefore, a PTA of approximately 3 years, 5 months, and 7 days was likely granted (April 11, 2032, minus November 4, 2028).

Patent Term Extension (PTE)

Patent Term Extension (PTE) is available under the Hatch-Waxman Act (35 U.S.C. § 156) for patents that claim products requiring regulatory approval, such as pharmaceuticals, medical devices, food additives, or color additives. This extension aims to restore a portion of the patent term lost during the regulatory review period. PTE can extend a patent for up to five years, but the total patent life with an extension cannot exceed 14 years from the date of FDA approval.

The patent abstract and claims for US9462411 describe a "mobile device mode enablement responsive to a proximity criterion" and "sensing by a smartphone... physiological data," neither of which suggests that the patent claims a product subject to regulatory review by agencies like the FDA. Therefore, it is highly unlikely that US9462411 would be eligible for a Patent Term Extension (PTE). The provided patent text does not mention any PTE being granted or applied for.

Continuation Applications

A continuation application is a second application for the same invention claimed in a prior non-provisional application and filed before the patenting or abandonment of the prior application. It uses the same specification and drawings as the parent application but can have different claims.

The "Priority Applications" section of the provided patent text lists US12/264,711 as the original application for US9462411, filed on 2008-11-04.

The "Family Applications After" section, and also within the "Priority applications" list, indicates several related applications that claim priority from the original filing date of 2008-11-04 (US12/264,711), or from later applications in the family, suggesting they are continuations, continuations-in-part, or divisionals.

• US15/251,882 (US9832708B2) - Filed 2016-08-30
• US15/800,885 (US10219199B2) - Filed 2017-11-01
• US16/012,513 (US10660015B2) - Filed 2018-06-19
• US16/251,834 (US10674432B2) - Filed 2019-01-18
• US15/929,609 (US11304118B2) - Filed 2020-05-12 (Title: Method and apparatus for sensing products for purchase)
• US17/653,748 (US11770756B2) - Filed 2022-03-07 (Title: Mobile device mode enablement/disablement responsive to sensing a physiological parameter)
• US18/450,517 (US12402066B2) - Filed 2023-08-16 (Title: Mobile device mode enablement/disablement responsive to sensing a physiological parameter)
• US18/489,517 (US11924743B2) - Filed 2023-10-18 (Title: Systems/methods of establishing a capability, and using the capability, to execute financial transactions by a smartphone)
• US18/523,863 (US11937172B1) - Filed 2023-11-29 (Title: Systems/methods of a two-step process in establishing a capability, and using the capability, to execute a financial transaction by a smartphone)
• US18/539,020 (US12028793B2) - Filed 2023-12-13 (Title: Systems/methods of establishing a capability, and then using the capability, to perform a financial transaction by a smartphone)
• US19/279,124 (US20250351055A1) - Filed 2025-07-24
• US19/359,019 (US20260040191A1) - Filed 2025-10-15

These listed applications, particularly those explicitly stating "Priority to US12/264,711" and having later filing dates but the same priority date, are considered continuation or divisional applications.

Divisional Applications

A divisional application is a type of continuing application filed when an earlier application contained claims to more than one invention, and the USPTO issued a "restriction requirement," forcing the applicant to elect one invention for prosecution. The non-elected inventions can then be pursued in divisional applications. Divisional applications benefit from the filing date of the earliest application from which they claim priority.

The patent document identifies US15/251,882 as a "Continuation" and lists it under "Related Child Applications". While the explicit type of "continuation" vs. "divisional" isn't always specified in the Google Patents interface beyond a generic "continuation," both fall under the umbrella of continuing applications that claim benefit from an earlier filing. The other applications listed above would also fall into this category.

Related Family Members

The patent family for US9462411 is extensive and includes both domestic and international applications, all stemming from the same priority date of 2008-11-04 (US12/264,711).

Domestic Family Members:
The numerous US patent applications listed above under "Continuation Applications" are all direct family members. They all claim priority to US12/264,711, which is the original filing from which US9462411 issued.

International Family Members:
The "Priority Applications" section also lists international family members:

• CA2742311A (CA2742311A1) - Filed 2009-10-30
• PCT/US2009/062792 (WO2010053839A1) - Filed 2009-10-30
• EP09825265A (EP2351414A4) - Filed 2009-10-30
• KR1020117012504A (KR20110091525A) - Filed 2009-10-30

These international applications demonstrate the global patenting strategy employed for this invention.

Projected Expiration Date

The "Legal status" section of US9462411 on Google Patents explicitly states the patent is "Active" and "expires 2032-04-11" with the note "Adjusted expiration." This date includes any Patent Term Adjustment (PTA) granted to compensate for delays during prosecution.

Therefore, the projected expiration date for US Patent 9,462,411 is April 11, 2032. [cite: US9462411B2]