Invalidity dossier
US 1063190
Oil-burner.
Current assignee: Individual
Added 9/21/2026, 10:31:59 AM
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 1,063,190
Title: Oil-burner.
Patentee/Inventor: George Fraser, of Topeka, Shawnee County, Kansas, a U.S. citizen. The source lists the assignee as "Individual" (current and original). No assignment or transfer information is supplied.
Key dates: Application filed May 20, 1912 (Serial No. 698,413); patent granted and published June 3, 1913; legal status listed as expired (anticipated expiration June 3, 1930).
Purpose: A simple, economical, efficient oil burner for stoves and furnaces, especially for burning lower grades of oil for domestic purposes, securing perfect combustion with minimum smoke, cheap manufacture, and easy installation in ordinary stoves or furnaces.
Plain-language scope: The disclosure covers three things: (1) a generator formed as an elongated closed trough casting containing a series of parallel passages in its side walls and bottom, joined through the ends into one continuous passage from an inlet to an outlet; (2) a burner/mixer body with a central passage, an internal nipple emitting gas, arms spanning the central passage with drilled passages, an annular passage around the central passage, and diametrically opposite threaded openings; and (3) the combination of generator, burner proper arranged below it, and a connecting pipe.
Claim 1 recites the trough-casting generator, a burner proper below it, and a pipe from outlet to burner. Claims 2 and 3 recite the burner body with central passage, nipple, arms with communicating passages, annular passage, and openings at diametrically opposite sides. Two lateral holes (30) feed gas to hole 29 from opposite sides to create a swirl for better air mixing; a removable plug (33) allows gas to be led elsewhere, e.g., to a lamp.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US1063190/en
Not established by the excerpt: the full text of claim 3 (it is truncated); the complete specification and drawing details; claim 4 or any further claims; the number or content of prior-art references; whether any claims were amended, rejected, or cancelled during prosecution; and any litigation, ownership transfer, or validity matters (excluded by scope).
Generated 10/1/2026, 10:01:31 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 1063190. 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.