Invalidity dossier
US 5920404
Method and system for dynamic control of a messaging environment from a facsimile processor
Current assignee: Micro Focus Software Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 2:25:26 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 5,920,404
Title: Method and system for dynamic control of a messaging environment from a facsimile processor
Patent number / application: US 5,920,404 A; application US 08/818,329, filed 1997-03-14.
Priority date: 1996-03-15. Publication (grant) date: 1999-07-06. Status: Expired – Lifetime (anticipated expiration 2017-03-14).
Inventor: Russel F. Weiser. Original assignee: Novell, Inc. The source lists a current assignee of Micro Focus Software Inc. and JPMorgan Chase Bank NA, but per the instructions above I make no findings about ownership transfers.
Field/classifications: Facsimile transmission and storage (H04N 1/00, 1/32, 1/32358, 1/324, 1/32406, 1/32411, 1/32432) and packet-switched user-to-user messaging/e-mail (H04L 51/00, 51/07, 51/18).
Purpose (as stated in the excerpt): The invention "relates to the use of facsimile devices in messaging environments, and more particularly relates to dynamically controlling from a first facsimile device the routing of a message in a messaging environment coupled to a second facsimile device." The excerpt defines "messaging environment" as referring "to computer networks and their primary function—the transfer of messages such as files, documents" (text truncated in the supplied excerpt).
Plain-language scope: A facsimile processor can issue dynamic control over how a message is routed through a network messaging environment, where that environment is linked to another facsimile device—i.e., fax-side control of network message routing rather than static, pre-set routing.
What the excerpt does not establish: No claims, claim language, detailed description, embodiments, or figures are included, so the precise metes and bounds of the claimed invention cannot be determined here. No prior-art references are identified in the excerpt (the "prior art keywords" list—facsimile processor, facsimile, messaging environment, processor, code—is a keyword index, not a citation). Dates are labeled in the source as assumptions, not legal conclusions. No validity, infringement, or litigation facts are stated. The classification entries are truncated/duplicated in the source.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:52:17 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5920404. 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.