Invalidity dossier

US 5802320

System for packet filtering of data packets at a computer network interface

Current assignee: Sun Microsystems Inc

Added 9/23/2026, 6:58:28 PM

At a glanceNo PTAB challengesNo litigation on file

Active provider: DeepSeek · deepseek-flash

Patent summary

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

✓ Generated

Patent Overview: US 5,802,320 A

Title: "System for packet filtering of data packets at a computer network interface"

Assignee: Sun Microsystems, Inc. (original assignee; listed current assignee is also Sun Microsystems Inc).

Key dates (per supplied text): Priority/filing date 1995-05-18; published/granted 1998-09-01; anticipated expiration 2015-09-01; status "Expired – Lifetime."

Application number: US08/444,351. Inventors: Baehr, Danielson, Lyon, Mulligan, Patterson, Scott, and Turbyfill. Related later filings cited in the text include US08/795,374 (US5878231A) and US08/795,373 (US5884025A), plus EP, SG, and JP counterparts.

Purpose: The invention screens data packets sent from one computer network to another, addressing the vulnerability of private networks to intruders and to "targeting" (characterization and attack) of filtering systems. Conventional filtering systems act as routers, respond to IP commands, and expose IP addresses. The invention instead provides a "screening system that acts as both a firewall in the conventional sense and a signatureless packet filtering system."

Plain-language scope: A screen sits in-line between, e.g., a public and a private network. It has a network interface for each network plus one or more ports to a proxy network. A packet-filtering module inspects each incoming packet and passes it to an engine, which decides actions based on the inspection and other information; an actions module executes them. If a packet is destined for a private-network host, it may be sent instead to a preconfigured host on the proxy network, which performs the expected (or different) operations. The proxy host generates responses using the actual host's IP address, so the proxy network is undetectable. The screening system is not a router, has no IP address of its own, and is therefore not subject to trace-route, ping, or finger. It requires no changes to the private/public networks and can be configured for other actions (dropping with/without error, logging, header alteration) while preserving anonymity.

Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US5802320/en

Not established by the excerpt: The full claims and their exact wording; detailed hardware (e.g., FIG. 8), flowcharts (FIGS. 10–11), and embodiment specifics, most of which are omitted. No litigation, ownership-transfer, validity, or prior-art analysis is provided or attempted.

Generated 10/1/2026, 9:42:24 PM

Cases on file (0)

Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5802320. 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.

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.

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.