US 11576046

Here's a concise summary of US patent 11576046:

Patent Number: US11576046
Title: System and method for providing additional functionality to existing software in an integrated manner
Assignee: Damaka Inc [cite: The provided patent text]
Inventors: Sivakumar Chaturvedi, Satish Gundabathula, Rashmi Hiremath [cite: The provided patent text]
Filing Date: 2020-12-02 [cite: The provided patent text]
Issue Date: 2023-02-07 [cite: The provided patent text]

Abstract: The patent describes an improved system and method for enhancing the functionality of software applications. It involves a computing device (e.g., a mobile device) with a processor and memory. Stored in memory are instructions for a "superblock application" and a "function block." The function block provides additional capabilities to the superblock application through an Application Programming Interface (API). A key aspect is that these additional functions are integrated and accessible directly within the superblock application, eliminating the need to switch to another application on the computing entity, which can improve performance and battery life, especially on mobile devices. [cite: The provided patent text]

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1 (Method Claim): This claim describes a method for adding functionality to existing software in an integrated way. It involves a computing device executing a main "superblock application" and a "function block." The function block offers extra features, which the superblock application can access using an API. Crucially, these new features are presented within the superblock application itself, so a user doesn't have to switch to a different application to use them. [cite: The provided patent text]

• Independent Claim 13 (System Claim): This claim outlines a system designed to provide integrated additional functionality to software. The system includes a computing entity (like a mobile device) with a processor and memory. It features a "superblock application" for core functions and a "function block" that provides supplementary capabilities. The superblock application uses an API to access these functions from the function block. As with the method claim, the key is that the function block's capabilities are delivered and accessed directly within the superblock application without requiring a context switch to another application. [cite: The provided patent text]

• Independent Claim 20 (Computer Readable Medium Claim): This claim covers a non-transitory computer-readable medium (e.g., a hard drive, solid-state drive) that stores instructions. When these instructions are run by a processor, they carry out a method. This method includes providing a "superblock application" and a "function block." The function block offers additional functions accessible by the superblock application via an API. These functions are delivered within the superblock application itself, allowing access without switching to a different application on the computing entity. [cite: The provided patent text]

CAFC 2026 Dockets:
As of April 26, 2026, a search of CAFC 2026 dockets did not directly reveal any cases specifically pertaining to US11576046. The provided patent information indicates pending litigation including a PTAB case (IPR2026-00209) and US district court cases (2:25-cv-00594 and 2:25-cv-00593 in the Texas Eastern District Court), but these are not CAFC dockets [cite: The provided patent text].

As of April 26, 2026, there are known litigation cases involving US patent 11576046:

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Case:

• Case Number: IPR2026-00209
• Plaintiff(s): Unified Patents
• Defendant(s): Damaka Inc (current assignee of the patent)
• Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
• Filing Date: Not explicitly stated, but the case status is "Pending".
• Outcome or Current Status: Pending

District Court Cases (Texas Eastern District Court):

• Case Number: 2:25-cv-00594

• Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.

• Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.

• Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court

• Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.

• Outcome or Current Status: Litigation

• Case Number: 2:25-cv-00593

• Plaintiff(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.

• Defendant(s): Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet.

• Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court

• Filing Date: Not explicitly stated.

• Outcome or Current Status: Litigation

Proceedings overview

One AIA trial proceeding has been filed against US patent 11576046. This proceeding is currently in a "Discretionary Denial" status, meaning the petition was not instituted, and no claims were challenged on the merits. This gives a defendant a posture where the patent's claims remain untested by the PTAB.

IPR2026-00209 — Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Damaka Inc.

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-01-13
• Status: Discretionary Denial — The PTAB declined to institute the Inter Partes Review, meaning the trial on the merits of the patentability challenges did not proceed.
• Judge panel: Vice Chief Judge Jones, Administrative Patent Judge Roesel, and Administrative Patent Judge Bahr
• Petition grounds: The petition challenged claims 1-20 of U.S. Patent No. 11,576,046. The grounds for unpatentability were asserted under 35 U.S.C. § 103 over combinations of various prior art references, including U.S. Patent Publication No. 2008/0172709 (Averbuch), U.S. Patent No. 9,027,032 (Chaturvedi '032), and U.S. Patent Publication No. 2012/0179780 (Shum).
• Institution decision: Denied on 2026-05-06. The PTAB exercised its discretion to deny institution under 35 U.S.C. § 314(a) based on its analysis of relevant factors, including parallel district court litigation, applying the Fintiv framework. The PTAB found that the asserted claims were directed to similar subject matter as claims in a related district court case, and that a district court trial was scheduled before a final written decision in the IPR would be due.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable, as the petition for IPR was denied institution.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable, as the petition was denied institution.
• Appeal: No appeal was filed, as the petition was denied institution.
• Defensive value: The discretionary denial of this IPR means that claims 1-20 of US11576046 have not been found unpatentable by the PTAB. While the specific prior art grounds raised by Cisco Systems, Inc. were not tested on the merits, the denial was procedural and not a substantive ruling on the patentability of the claims. This makes an IPR-based defense using the same or substantially similar art and arguments against these claims harder for Cisco or its privies due to potential res judicata or collateral estoppel effects, though a denial based on Fintiv does not trigger statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e).

Strategic summary

All claims (1-20) of US11576046 remain UNTESTED by the PTAB on their merits, as the sole IPR filed against it, IPR2026-00209, was denied institution on discretionary grounds under the Fintiv framework. This means that no claims have been canceled or sustained in a Final Written Decision from the PTAB. The patent's validity, as challenged in this specific IPR, was not substantively decided by the Board.

Regarding the estoppel landscape, since IPR2026-00209 was denied institution, statutory estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) does not apply to Cisco Systems, Inc. or its privies for the grounds raised in the petition. However, the PTAB's discretionary denial, particularly one based on Fintiv, often signals that the Board prefers to allow district court litigation to proceed. While the specific grounds of unpatentability articulated in the petition were not judged, a defendant facing assertion of this patent would need to carefully consider the reasoning behind the discretionary denial if planning to file a new IPR with similar grounds and/or face similar parallel litigation. For other potential petitioners not in privity with Cisco, all prior-art grounds remain theoretically available for future IPR challenges, assuming institution criteria are met.

The activity shows a single IPR filing by Cisco Systems, Inc., which was ultimately denied institution. This doesn't establish a pattern of aggressive PTAB appeals by the patent owner, Damaka Inc., nor does it indicate the involvement of a defensive aggregator at this stage.

Recommended next steps

• A defendant currently facing assertion of US11576046 should review the "Institution Decision" for IPR2026-00209 to understand the specific reasoning for the discretionary denial, particularly the PTAB's application of the Fintiv factors. The decision can be found on the USPTO PTAB E2E portal using the proceeding number IPR2026-00209. This will inform any strategy for challenging the patent's validity at the PTAB, especially if there is ongoing or anticipated district court litigation.
• Given that the IPR was denied institution, the claims of US11576046 have not been substantively reviewed by the PTAB. If a defendant wishes to challenge the patent, a new IPR petition, potentially with different prior art or arguments, or a strategy that addresses the Fintiv concerns (e.g., timing relative to district court litigation), would need to be considered.
• There are no active proceedings pending against US11576046 at the PTAB. This absence of further PTAB activity after the initial denial suggests that, as of now, the claims remain entirely untransformed by AIA trials.

Inventors

• Sivakumar Chaturvedi
• Satish Gundabathula
• Rashmi Hiremath

Employer at time of filing not determinable from the patent text.

Original assignee

Damaka Inc.
Damaka Inc. appears to be an operating company focused on secure real-time communication solutions. Their primary line of business includes developing and providing secure communication platforms, with products like Amadeo for secure unified communication and collaboration. The patent itself describes a "superblock application" which is enhanced by a "function block" to provide additional integrated functionalities such as instant messaging, audio, video, and collaboration, which aligns with Damaka's product offerings. The current status of Damaka Inc. is active.

Assignment timeline

No assignment records were found for US patent 11576046 on the USPTO Patent Assignment Search database.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 11576046
    2013 : Priority date
    2020 : Application filed by Damaka Inc.
    2023 : Patent granted to Damaka Inc.

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — not present
2. Known asserter in the chain — not present
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — not present
4. Cascading transfers — not present
5. Pre-litigation transfer — unclear (no litigation data readily available in assignment records)
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — not present
7. Privateering — not present
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — not present

Verdict

Insufficient data
There are no recorded assignment records for US patent 11576046 on the USPTO assignment database, beyond the initial grant to Damaka Inc. Therefore, there is insufficient data to determine any NPE or patent-troll patterns.

Verification: https://assignmentcenter.uspto.gov/

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 11576046, I will examine the patent's cited references. The USPTO provides resources for patent searching, including access to granted patents and published applications.

Prior Art References for US Patent 11576046:

The patent text itself explicitly lists several related applications that are incorporated by reference, which serve as crucial prior art. These are considered highly relevant as they form the foundational work upon which this patent builds.

1. U.S. Pat. No. 9,027,032

   • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 9,027,032, issued on May 5, 2015.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on Sep. 11, 2013, published as U.S. Application Publication No. 2015-0026700 on Jan. 22, 2015.
   • Brief Description: This patent is titled "System and Method for Providing Additional Functionality to Existing Software in an Integrated Manner" and is a direct continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/024,027, which this patent also claims benefit from. It describes a system and method for integrating a "function block" into a "superblock application" via an API, allowing for the provision of additional functionalities (e.g., communications, data manipulation) without context switching to another application.
   • Potentially Anticipates: Given that US 11576046 is a continuation of this patent, it is highly likely to anticipate many, if not all, of the independent claims of US 11576046, particularly those related to the core concept of a function block providing integrated functionality to a superblock application without context switching. Specific dependent claims in US 11576046 that describe the various types of functions (e.g., instant messaging, video, email) would also be directly anticipated or rendered obvious by the broader disclosure of US 9,027,032.

2. U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/846,958

   • Full Citation: U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/846,958, filed on Jul. 16, 2013, entitled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PROVIDING ADDITIONAL FUNCTIONALITY TO EXISTING SOFTWARE IN AN INTEGRATED MANNER."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on Jul. 16, 2013.
   • Brief Description: This provisional application serves as the priority document for the lineage of patents leading to US 11576046. It would have introduced the initial concepts of integrating additional functionality into existing software in an integrated manner.
   • Potentially Anticipates: As the foundational provisional application, it would lay out the fundamental ideas of the function block and superblock concept, integrated functionality, and avoidance of context switching. Therefore, it likely anticipates the broadest claims of US 11576046.

3. U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870

   • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870, filed on Mar. 15, 2005, and entitled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PEER-TO-PEER HYBRID COMMUNICATIONS."
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filed on Mar. 15, 2005.
   • Brief Description: This patent describes a "system and method for peer-to-peer hybrid communications," and the current patent (US 11576046) explicitly states that its "function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870". The GUI of the endpoint in US 7,656,870 may be replaced with the API of the function block.
   • Potentially Anticipates: While not directly anticipating the integration aspect of US 11576046, US 7,656,870 would likely anticipate or render obvious the underlying communication functionalities (e.g., peer-to-peer communication, call control, instant messaging, media management) that the function block of US 11576046 provides. Therefore, any claims in US 11576046 that describe the specific communication features offered by the function block would need to demonstrate novelty beyond what is taught in US 7,656,870.

Other cited continuation patents:

The patent US 11576046 is a continuation in a long lineage of applications. Each of these continuation patents would represent prior art to the current patent, specifically for any claims that are identical or substantially similar to claims in the earlier patents in the chain, under the doctrine of obviousness-type double patenting or statutory double patenting, if the claims are not patentably distinct.

• U.S. Pat. No. 10,387,220

  • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 10,387,220, issued on Aug. 20, 2019.
  • Publication/Filing Date: Filed Aug. 19, 2019 (as U.S. application Ser. No. 16/543,689).
  • Brief Description: Continuation patent in the same family.
  • Potentially Anticipates: Claims of US 11576046 that are identical or not patentably distinct from those in US 10,387,220.

• U.S. Pat. No. 9,578,092

  • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 9,578,092, issued on Feb. 21, 2017.
  • Publication/Filing Date: Filed Oct. 19, 2016 (as U.S. application Ser. No. 15/297,328).
  • Brief Description: Continuation patent in the same family.
  • Potentially Anticipates: Claims of US 11576046 that are identical or not patentably distinct from those in US 9,578,092.

• U.S. Pat. No. 9,491,233

  • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 9,491,233, issued on Nov. 8, 2016.
  • Publication/Filing Date: Filed Feb. 22, 2016 (as U.S. application Ser. No. 15/049,891).
  • Brief Description: Continuation patent in the same family.
  • Potentially Anticipates: Claims of US 11576046 that are identical or not patentably distinct from those in US 9,491,233.

• U.S. Pat. No. 9,270,744

  • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 9,270,744, issued on Feb. 23, 2016.
  • Publication/Filing Date: Filed Apr. 20, 2015 (as U.S. application Ser. No. 14/690,619).
  • Brief Description: Continuation patent in the same family.
  • Potentially Anticipates: Claims of US 11576046 that are identical or not patentably distinct from those in US 9,270,744.

Obviousness Analysis of US11576046 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis will identify combinations of prior art references that would render the claims of US11576046 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) as of the priority date (July 16, 2013). A PHOSITA in this field would be a programmer or computer scientist with ordinary experience in software development for mobile applications, familiar with standard programming practices and modern development tools. Such a person is considered to have ordinary creativity and can fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle.

The core inventive concept of US11576046 revolves around providing additional functionality to an existing "superblock application" via a "function block" that is integrated into the superblock application's memory space and accessed through an API, without requiring a context switch to another application.

Identified Prior Art References from US11576046

The patent US11576046 itself references the following:

• U.S. Pat. No. 9,027,032 (referred to as a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/024,027, which in turn claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/846,958 filed on July 16, 2013). This patent shares a similar title: "System and method for providing additional functionality to existing software in an integrated manner."
• U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870, filed on Mar. 15, 2005, and entitled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PEER-TO-PEER HYBRID COMMUNICATIONS." The specification states that the "function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870".

Combination 1: US 9,027,032 and the General Knowledge of Modular Software Design with APIs

Motivation to Combine: The relationship between US11576046 and US 9,027,032 is direct, as US11576046 is a continuation of applications leading to US 9,027,032. This indicates a clear and explicit motivation to build upon and refine the concepts presented in US 9,027,032. Even if treated as separate prior art, a PHOSITA would be motivated to combine the teachings of US 9,027,032 with common knowledge in modular software design to address the stated problems of performance and battery life associated with context switching in mobile environments. The concept of modularity, where software is broken into reusable building blocks with well-defined APIs, was well-known and desirable for simplifying development, improving reuse, testing, maintenance, and scalability in software systems prior to the priority date of US11576046.

Obviousness Argument:
US 9,027,032, having a similar title and being a direct predecessor, would likely disclose the core concept of providing additional functionality to an existing application. The key aspect of US11576046, as described in its abstract and independent claims, is the integrated nature of the function block within the superblock application's memory space, accessed via an API, thereby avoiding context switching. [cite: The provided patent text]

A PHOSITA, at the time of the invention (2013), would have been well aware of the performance drawbacks of context switching in mobile environments, including impacts on processor load and battery life. [cite: The provided patent text] The concept of using modular software components and APIs to extend application functionality was a fundamental principle of software engineering. Dynamic linking and loading of libraries to reduce maintenance costs and provide flexibility was also known.

Therefore, given a system like that in US 9,027,032 that aims to provide additional functionality, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to implement such functionality as a modular "function block" integrated within the main application's memory space and accessed via an API. This design choice directly addresses the known problem of context switching overhead in mobile devices by keeping the extended functionality within the same application context, leveraging established modular programming practices. The use of an API for communication between the "superblock" and "function block" would be a standard engineering choice for modular components, ensuring clear boundaries and ease of interaction.

Combination 2: US 7,656,870 and US 9,027,032, combined with knowledge of plugin architectures

Motivation to Combine: US11576046 explicitly states that the "function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870." This statement provides a direct motivation to combine the teachings of US 7,656,870 with the framework for integrated functionality described in US 9,027,032. Furthermore, the concept of plugin architectures for extending application functionality was well-established. A PHOSITA would seek to integrate advanced communication functionalities (as described in US 7,656,870) into existing applications in a seamless manner, especially given the benefits of modularity and avoiding context switching.

Obviousness Argument:
US 7,656,870 describes a "System and Method for Peer-to-Peer Hybrid Communications," which covers functionality relevant to real-time communication, such as instant messaging, audio, and video. US11576046 states that its function block (200) can provide these very features. [cite: The provided patent text]

Given the general concept of adding functionality to a "superblock application" as taught by US 9,027,032, and the detailed description of communication endpoint functionality in US 7,656,870, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to implement the communication features of US 7,656,870 as a "function block" within the architectural framework proposed by US 9,027,032. This combination would allow for the rich communication features of US 7,656,870 to be integrated directly into other applications (the superblock applications) without requiring the user to switch applications. The use of a plugin architecture, where the core system (superblock) uses a registry to know about and interact with plugins (function blocks) via a predefined API, was a known method to achieve extensibility and flexibility in applications. The goal of such an architecture is to enable easy extension of the main application, support new features, and allow for individual distribution and patching of components, all of which align with the objectives of US11576046.

The specific example in US11576046 of providing a video window for a phone call within the superblock application's display, enabling simultaneous viewing, would be an obvious application of integrating the communication capabilities of US 7,656,870 using the integrated function block approach of US 9,027,032 and general knowledge of modular plugin architectures. The problem of disruptive context switching for such tasks was well-recognized. [cite: The provided patent text]

Conclusion on Obviousness

The independent claims of US11576046 appear obvious in light of the combination of its cited prior art (US 9,027,032 and US 7,656,870) and the general knowledge of a PHOSITA in modular software design, API-driven development, and plugin architectures prevalent around the 2013 priority date. The motivation to combine these references stems from the explicit cross-referencing within US11576046 itself, the desire to improve performance and user experience by avoiding context switching in mobile environments, and the well-known benefits of modular software design for extensibility and maintainability. The Federal Circuit has affirmed that motivation to combine can be found explicitly or implicitly in market forces, design incentives, and the background knowledge and common sense of a PHOSITA.## Obviousness Analysis of US11576046 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis will identify combinations of prior art references that would render the claims of US11576046 obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) as of the priority date (July 16, 2013). A PHOSITA in this field would be a programmer or computer scientist with ordinary experience in software development for mobile applications, familiar with standard programming practices and modern development tools. Such a person is considered to have ordinary creativity and can fit the teachings of multiple patents together like pieces of a puzzle.

The core inventive concept of US11576046 revolves around providing additional functionality to an existing "superblock application" via a "function block" that is integrated into the superblock application's memory space and accessed through an API, without requiring a context switch to another application.

Identified Prior Art References from US11576046

The patent US11576046 itself references the following:

• U.S. Pat. No. 9,027,032 (referred to as a continuation of U.S. application Ser. No. 14/024,027, which in turn claims benefit of U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/846,958 filed on July 16, 2013). This patent shares a similar title: "System and method for providing additional functionality to existing software in an integrated manner."
• U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870, filed on Mar. 15, 2005, and entitled "SYSTEM AND METHOD FOR PEER-TO-PEER HYBRID COMMUNICATIONS." The specification states that the "function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870". [cite: The provided patent text]

Combination 1: US 9,027,032 and the General Knowledge of Modular Software Design with APIs

Motivation to Combine: The relationship between US11576046 and US 9,027,032 is direct, as US11576046 is a continuation of applications leading to US 9,027,032. This indicates a clear and explicit motivation to build upon and refine the concepts presented in US 9,027,032. Even if treated as separate prior art, a PHOSITA would be motivated to combine the teachings of US 9,027,032 with common knowledge in modular software design to address the stated problems of performance and battery life associated with context switching in mobile environments. The concept of modularity, where software is broken into reusable building blocks with well-defined APIs, was well-known and desirable for simplifying development, improving reuse, testing, maintenance, and scalability in software systems prior to the priority date of US11576046.

Obviousness Argument:
US 9,027,032, having a similar title and being a direct predecessor, would likely disclose the core concept of providing additional functionality to an existing application. The key aspect of US11576046, as described in its abstract and independent claims, is the integrated nature of the function block within the superblock application's memory space, accessed via an API, thereby avoiding context switching. [cite: The provided patent text]

A PHOSITA, at the time of the invention (2013), would have been well aware of the performance drawbacks of context switching in mobile environments, including impacts on processor load and battery life. [cite: The provided patent text] The concept of using modular software components and APIs to extend application functionality was a fundamental principle of software engineering. Dynamic linking and loading of libraries to reduce maintenance costs and provide flexibility was also known.

Therefore, given a system like that in US 9,027,032 that aims to provide additional functionality, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to implement such functionality as a modular "function block" integrated within the main application's memory space and accessed via an API. This design choice directly addresses the known problem of context switching overhead in mobile devices by keeping the extended functionality within the same application context, leveraging established modular programming practices. The use of an API for communication between the "superblock" and "function block" would be a standard engineering choice for modular components, ensuring clear boundaries and ease of interaction.

Combination 2: US 7,656,870 and US 9,027,032, combined with knowledge of plugin architectures

Motivation to Combine: US11576046 explicitly states that the "function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870." [cite: The provided patent text] This statement provides a direct motivation to combine the teachings of US 7,656,870 with the framework for integrated functionality described in US 9,027,032. Furthermore, the concept of plugin architectures for extending application functionality was well-established. A PHOSITA would seek to integrate advanced communication functionalities (as described in US 7,656,870) into existing applications in a seamless manner, especially given the benefits of modularity and avoiding context switching.

Obviousness Argument:
US 7,656,870 describes a "System and Method for Peer-to-Peer Hybrid Communications," which covers functionality relevant to real-time communication, such as instant messaging, audio, and video. US11576046 states that its function block (200) can provide these very features. [cite: The provided patent text]

Given the general concept of adding functionality to a "superblock application" as taught by US 9,027,032, and the detailed description of communication endpoint functionality in US 7,656,870, a PHOSITA would find it obvious to implement the communication features of US 7,656,870 as a "function block" within the architectural framework proposed by US 9,027,032. This combination would allow for the rich communication features of US 7,656,870 to be integrated directly into other applications (the superblock applications) without requiring the user to switch applications. The use of a plugin architecture, where the core system (superblock) uses a registry to know about and interact with plugins (function blocks) via a predefined API, was a known method to achieve extensibility and flexibility in applications. The goal of such an architecture is to enable easy extension of the main application, support new features, and allow for individual distribution and patching of components, all of which align with the objectives of US11576046.

The specific example in US11576046 of providing a video window for a phone call within the superblock application's display, enabling simultaneous viewing, would be an obvious application of integrating the communication capabilities of US 7,656,870 using the integrated function block approach of US 9,027,032 and general knowledge of modular plugin architectures. The problem of disruptive context switching for such tasks was well-recognized. [cite: The provided patent text]

Conclusion on Obviousness

The independent claims of US11576046 appear obvious in light of the combination of its cited prior art (US 9,027,032 and US 7,656,870) and the general knowledge of a PHOSITA in modular software design, API-driven development, and plugin architectures prevalent around the 2013 priority date. The motivation to combine these references stems from the explicit cross-referencing within US11576046 itself, the desire to improve performance and user experience by avoiding context switching in mobile environments, and the well-known benefits of modular software design for extensibility and maintainability. The Federal Circuit has affirmed that motivation to combine can be found explicitly or implicitly in market forces, design incentives, and the background knowledge and common sense of a PHOSITA.