Invalidity dossier
US 11797671
Cyberanalysis workflow acceleration
Current assignee: Centripetal Networks LLC
Added 9/20/2026, 5:17:44 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: US11797671B2 — "Cyberanalysis workflow acceleration"
Bibliographic data (from supplied text): Assignee/current assignee: Centripetal Networks LLC (original assignee also listed as Centripetal Networks LLC; a reassignment record names Centripetal Networks, Inc.). Inventors: Sean Moore, Jonathan R. Rogers, Jess P. Parnell, Zachary Ehnerd. Priority date (stated as an assumption): 2017-07-10. Filing date: 2022-12-16 (application US18/082,950). Publication date: 2023-10-24. Legal status: Active, adjusted expiration 2038-07-09. Classification includes G06F21/554 and H04L63/1416.
Purpose (as described): Network-threat event logs are said to be generated faster than human cyberanalysts can investigate them. Because only a small portion of logged threat events are "reportable," time spent on non-reportable events is described as wasted effort. The patent addresses accelerating the cyberanalysis workflow.
Plain-language scope (from the excerpted description): A monitoring device receives threat detection rules, inspects TCP/IP packets, determines whether packets/communications match rule criteria (threat indicators, signatures, or behavior patterns), logs and optionally captures packets, and designates the communication a threat event. Logs may be queued as tasks in arrival order and presented to a cyberanalyst or cyberanalysis system via a user interface. The workflow includes reviewing/investigating the event, determining type and severity (e.g., critical asset damage), determining mitigating/remedial actions, and reporting the event as a "finding" to authorities (management, network security operations, regulatory agencies) — or determining it is not reportable. The cyberanalysis system may review and summarize event information and suggest determinations and actions to the analyst; a management device may transmit reporting messages to authority network devices for regulatory compliance, and network security operations may execute mitigations. The cycle repeats with the next event.
What the excerpt does not establish: The actual claim language is not included, so the precise claimed scope is not established. The excerpt is expressly partial and cuts off mid-sentence. It does not establish the specific "acceleration" mechanisms, any comparative data, litigation, ownership history, validity, or prior art. The source notes dates and legal status are assumptions, not legal conclusions.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US11797671](/patent/US11797671)/en
Generated 10/1/2026, 10:02:55 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 11797671. 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.