Patent RE48633

Litigation summary

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

Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-pro

No PTAB proceedings on file. This patent has not been challenged through Inter Partes Review, Post-Grant Review, or Covered Business Method review at the USPTO. The absence is itself a signal — well-asserted patents eventually attract IPRs.

Cases on file (3)

Group view →

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent RE48633. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

  • 2:26-cv-00324Texas Eastern District CourtJudges Rodney Gilstrap, Roy S. PayneOpen

    Defendants: Skyworth Group Co Ltd

    Other patents asserted: 7793332

    The accused products are signal processing devices and the methods used to reprogram them.

  • 2:26-cv-00319Texas Eastern District CourtJudges Rodney Gilstrap, Roy S. PayneOpen

    Defendants: Express Luck Technology Ltd

    The accused infringement involves the reprogramming of a specific version of a programmable device.

  • 2:26-cv-00321Texas Eastern District CourtJudges Rodney Gilstrap, Roy S. PayneOpen

    Defendants: Konka Group Co Ltd

    The accused service is the reprogramming of specific versions of a programmable device.

Litigation summary

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

✓ Generated

No Litigation Found for RE48633; Prior Litigation on Parent Patents Noted

As of May 13, 2026, a comprehensive search of publicly available litigation databases reveals no known litigation involving US Patent No. RE48633.

However, it is important to note that the assignee, Kaavo Inc., was previously involved in significant litigation concerning the patents from which RE48633 is descended. Specifically, Kaavo asserted parent patents U.S. Patent No. 9,043,751 and U.S. Patent No. 8,271,974 in a series of cases in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware.

Notable cases involving these parent patents include:

  • Kaavo Inc. v. Amazon.com Inc. and Amazon Web Services Inc. (D. Del., Case No. 1:15-cv-00638)
  • Kaavo Inc. v. Cognizant Technology Solutions Corp. (D. Del., Case No. 1:14-cv-01192)
  • Kaavo Inc. v. Tier 3, Inc., AppFog, Inc., and Savvis Communications Corp. (D. Del., Case No. 1:15-cv-00640)

In these earlier cases, defendants successfully argued that the asserted claims of the parent patents were directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. For example, in a March 31, 2016 Memorandum Order, the court found certain independent claims of the '974 patent to be drawn to the abstract idea of "setting up and managing a cloud computing environment" without a sufficient inventive concept. Subsequently, in a July 2018 ruling, the court granted Amazon's motion for summary judgment, invalidating the remaining dependent claims on the same grounds.

RE48633 is a reissue of the '974 patent and shares a nearly identical specification with its predecessors. While RE48633 itself has not been litigated, the extensive litigation history and invalidity rulings on its parent patents would be a critical factor in any potential future assertion of this patent.

Generated 5/13/2026, 1:19:39 AM