Invalidity dossier
US 10841177
Content delivery framework having autonomous CDN partitioned into multiple virtual CDNs to implement CDN interconnection, delegation, and federation
Current assignee: Sandpiper Cdn LLC
Added 9/23/2026, 8:35:52 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 — US10841177B2
Title: Content delivery framework having autonomous CDN partitioned into multiple virtual CDNs to implement CDN interconnection, delegation, and federation.
Patent number: US10841177B2 | Application: US14/105,915 | Other version: US20140223017A1
Assignee (current, as listed): Sandpiper CDN LLC. Original assignee: Level 3 Communications LLC.
Key dates: Priority date 2012-12-13; filing date 2013-12-13; publication of US20140223017A1 on 2014-08-07; patent granted and published 2020-11-17. Listed status: Active, with an adjusted expiration of 2038-04-16 (the source describes legal status and the priority date as assumptions, not legal conclusions).
Inventors: Laurence R. Lipstone, William Crowder, Andrew Swart, Christopher Newton, Lewis Robert Varney.
Purpose and plain-language scope: According to the supplied excerpt, the patent concerns a content delivery framework in which an autonomous CDN (content delivery network) is partitioned into multiple virtual CDNs. This partitioning is used to implement CDN interconnection, delegation, and federation — that is, letting one CDN operate as, or alongside, separate virtual CDNs for purposes such as connecting networks, delegating delivery responsibilities, and federating across CDNs. The excerpt's prior-art keywords ("cdn," "service," "virtual," "services," "parent") are consistent with a service hierarchy in which CDN services relate to one another, including parent relationships.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US10841177](/patent/US10841177)/en (Google Patents; fetched 2026-09-23).
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text is explicitly marked "[Excerpt only; consult the source for omitted text.]" and contains no claims, no detailed description, and no abstract. It therefore does not establish the specific claim scope, claim count, or claim language; the technical details of how partitioning, delegation, or federation are implemented; any prior-art references or their teachings; or an inventor-by-inventor contribution breakdown. It also does not establish the accuracy of the listed legal status, assignee, or dates, all of which the source presents as assumptions or unverified listings. The excerpt does not indicate whether any claims were amended or cancelled during prosecution, and it does not evidence validity, enforceability, or infringement. No litigation was reviewed here, and the excerpt's litigation link is not a statement about any proceeding. No facts beyond the supplied text have been added.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:19 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 10841177. 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.