Invalidity dossier
US 5544321
Added 9/23/2026, 1:42:16 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: US5544321A
Title: System for granting ownership of device by user based on requested level of ownership, present state of the device, and the context of the device
Patent number: US5544321A | Application number: US08/474,282
Assignee: Original assignee Xerox Corp; current assignee listed as UBICOMM LLC (per the source's own disclaimer, assignees may be inaccurate and Google has not performed a legal analysis).
Key dates (as listed; the source labels priority date and legal status as assumptions, not legal conclusions):
- Priority date: 1993-12-03
- Filing date: 1995-06-07
- Publication/grant date: 1996-08-06
- Anticipated expiration: 2013-12-03
- Status: Expired – Lifetime
Inventors: Marvin M. Theimer, Michael J. Spreitzer, Mark D. Weiser, Richard J. Goldstein, Scott A. Elrod, Daniel C. Swinehart, William N. Schilit, Robert T. Krivacic, Roy Want.
Purpose and plain-language scope (from the title and prior-art keywords only): The title indicates a system that grants "ownership" of a device to a user, where the grant is determined by (1) the level of ownership the user requests, (2) the device's present state, and (3) the device's context. Prior-art keywords listed are: user, location, information, devices, useragent. This suggests a scheme in which a user's request for control of a device is evaluated against the device's current condition and surroundings (context/location) before ownership is conferred. The classification entries (e.g., H04L12/2803 home automation networks; G06F21/31 user authentication; H04W4/02 location-based services) are consistent with a device-access/authentication context, but classifications are indexing metadata, not claim text.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US5544321](/patent/US5544321)/en
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text contains no claims, no abstract, no written description, and no drawings content. It therefore does not establish the specific claimed elements, claim scope, embodiments, or how ownership levels or "context" are actually determined. It also omits any verified litigation, transfer, validity, or prior-art analysis (and none is offered here).
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:52:55 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5544321. 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.