Invalidity dossier
US 5671282
Method and apparatus for document verification and tracking
Current assignee: Ricoh Co Ltd
Added 9/23/2026, 2:24:04 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: US 5,671,282 A
Title: Method and apparatus for document verification and tracking
Patent Number: US 5,671,282 A (Application No. US08/376,861)
Inventors: Gregory J. Wolff; David G. Stork; K. Venkatesh Prasad
Assignee: Ricoh Co Ltd; Ricoh Americas Corp (originally assigned to Ricoh Corporation, Ricoh Company, Ltd.)
Dates: Priority/filing date 1995-01-23; publication/grant date 1997-09-23; anticipated expiration 2015-01-23. Status listed as Expired – Lifetime.
Purpose: The invention addresses verification and tracking of paper and electronic documents. The supplied text explains that documents can be altered in ways that are difficult to detect — for example, a prescription's written portion may be "whited out" and photocopied, allowing fraudulent reuse. The patent seeks to prove document authenticity while reliably ascertaining valid data, and notes prior credit-card verification systems that read machine-readable cards against a database but "do not authenticate printed or written data on paper documents."
Plain-language scope: The system has a server subsystem (101) and a client subsystem (102) coupled by a data network (103). The server creates a paper document bearing both human readable and machine readable information, where the machine readable information corresponds in part to the human readable information, and maintains an electronic version for verification and tracking. The machine readable information is specific to the document, enabling tracking; in one embodiment it is a 2D barcode and may be encrypted, and may include a unique identifier, version number, date, and other relevant information (e.g., a drug name). The client receives the document, interprets the machine readable information, and contacts the server, which uses its archived electronic version to indicate whether the document contains valid information — including whether human readable information has been changed. Server components include document storage (101A), communications facilities (101B), intelligent processing (101C), and a print engine (101D). The server may prevent documents from being "re-verified" by removing them from storage. A stated application is prescription verification and tracking, and the system may also support version control and automatic forms processing.
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide full claims, complete figure details, prosecution history, or the full specification. It contains no information about litigation, ownership transfers after the listed reassignment, or validity. No prior-art analysis or legal conclusions about status are established.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:52:19 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5671282. 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.