Invalidity dossier
US 5959529
Added 9/23/2026, 3:14:16 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: US5959529A
Title: Reprogrammable remote sensor monitoring system
Patent number: US5959529A
Application number: US08/813,846
Inventor: Karl A. Kail, IV
Original assignee: Individual
Current assignee (per listing): Braemar Manufacturing LLC
Prior art date / Priority date: 1997-03-07
Filing date: 1997-03-07
Publication (grant) date: 1999-09-28
Legal status (as listed): Expired – Lifetime; anticipated expiration 2017-03-07
Purpose (plain language): The patent describes a remote sensor monitoring system built around a microprocessor, a portable monitoring device, and a central monitoring device. Sensor data collected by the portable device is conveyed to a central monitoring location. The "reprogrammable" aspect indicated by the title and the listed prior-art keywords ("microprocessor," "monitoring device," "portable," "central monitoring," "subject") suggests the system's monitoring behavior can be reconfigured rather than being fixed at manufacture.
Scope: The classifications shown associate the disclosure with alarms responsive to undesired or abnormal conditions (G08B21/00, G08B21/18), signalling/alarm systems generally, position determination such as GPS receivers for emergency applications (G01S19/01, G01S19/14, G01S19/17), surveillance imagery (G08B13/196 series), and healthcare device operation (G16H40/60, G16H40/63). These entries indicate the claimed subject matter spans monitoring, alarm, and healthcare-informatics contexts.
Family/related filings noted in the excerpt: JP53861798A, AU64433/98A, PCT/US1998/003925 (WO1998039749A1), EP98910106.8 (EP0965112B1), CN98803102 (CN1127704C), and continuation US09/357,689 (US6225901B1).
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US5959529](/patent/US5959529)/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not reproduce the specification, drawings, or the actual claims, so the precise claimed scope, the specific reprogramming mechanism, and the sensors involved cannot be stated with confidence. It also does not establish the accuracy of the listed assignees, the priority/legal-status assertions (expressly described on the source as assumptions, not legal conclusions), or any litigation outcome.
Note: Per the supplied excerpt, I have not researched litigation, ownership transfers, validity, or prior art.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:51:43 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 5959529. 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.