Invalidity dossier

US 12021679

Cluster computing

Current assignee: Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.

Added 8/27/2026, 4:47:51 AM

At a glanceNo PTAB challenges2 lawsuits on fileasserted by Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-v4-flash

Patent summary

Title, assignee, inventors, filing/issue dates, abstract, and a plain-language overview of the claims.

✓ Generated

Patent Overview — US12021679B1, "Cluster computing"

Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US12021679](/patent/US12021679)/en

Bibliographic data (as listed): Patent number US12021679B1; application US18/479,720; filing date 2023-10-02; granted/publication date 2024-06-25; priority date 2006-06-13; inventors Zvi Tannenbaum and Dean E. Dauger; current and original assignee Advanced Cluster Systems Inc; legal status listed as Active, with anticipated expiration 2027-05-04. Classification includes G06F9/5072 (grid computing), G06F15/76, and G06F9/54 (interprogram communication).

Purpose: Computer clusters comprise two or more computers, microprocessors, and/or processor cores ("nodes") that intercommunicate to accomplish a task as though they were a single computer. Many application programs are not designed to benefit from clusters; some run on only a single node, and some include an interpreter ("kernel") designed to communicate with a single node — Mathematica® is given as an example. Grid computers instead use a master node managing slave/computational nodes, with kernels running on single nodes and intermediate results not affecting other jobs.

Plain-language scope (from the supplied text): Embodiments add cluster computing functionality to a program without access to its source code. A first, second, and third processor are provided with respective kernels translating commands into code for execution. Cluster node modules send commands to their kernels and communicate with one another via the first cluster node module, which may include a data structure storing messages from other modules. A cluster node module can accept and interpret instructions from a user interface and appear as a single-node kernel to that interface. Support may include Message Passing Interface (MPI) calls, a toolkit with library calls or high-level cluster commands, and Macintosh®, Windows®-based PC, and Unix/Linux workstations. Command line or Mathematica front-end interfaces are mentioned.

What the excerpt does not establish: It does not establish claim text, prosecution history, the litigation listed in the source, ownership changes, validity, or prior art beyond what is quoted; the excerpt is expressly partial.

Generated 10/1/2026, 10:03:43 PM

Cases on file (2)

Group view →

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 12021679. The free-form analysis below may also discuss cases beyond this list.

Litigation summary

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

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

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.

Current assignee: Advanced Cluster Systems, Inc.

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

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.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Prior art

Earlier patents, publications, and products that may anticipate or render the claims unpatentable.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Obviousness

Combinations of prior art that suggest the claimed invention would have been obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Extensions

Patent term adjustments, term extensions, continuations, divisionals, family members, and expiration dates.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Derivative works

Defensive disclosure: derivative variations of each claim designed to render future incremental improvements obvious or non-novel.

Log in to generate
Not generated yet. Log in to request this analysis.

Keep exploring