Invalidity dossier
US 6053856
Tubing set apparatus and method for separation of fluid components
Current assignee: Terumo BCT Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 2:25:19 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 6,053,856
Title: Tubing set apparatus and method for separation of fluid components
Patent number: US 6,053,856 A (application US 08/853,374)
Inventor: Dennis Hlavinka
Original assignee: Cobe Laboratories Inc.; current assignee listed as Terumo BCT Inc. The record shows a chain of reassignments (Cobe Laboratories → Gambro, Inc. → Gambro BCT, Inc. → CaridianBCT, Inc. → Terumo BCT, Inc.).
Key dates (per the source):
- Priority date: 1995-04-18 (claimed from US 08/423,578, which issued as US 5,674,173)
- Filing date: 1997-05-08
- Publication/grant date: 2000-04-25
- Anticipated expiration: 2015-04-18
- Legal status: Expired – Lifetime
Classifications (selected): A61M 1/36 and A61M 1/3693 (extracorporeal blood circuits using density-based separation, e.g. centrifuging); A61M 1/02 and 1/0209 (blood transfusion apparatus; multiple bag systems for separating or storing blood components); B04B 5/04 and 5/0428 (radial chamber apparatus for separating liquid mixtures, including with flexible receptacles).
Purpose and plain-language scope: Based on the supplied text, the patent concerns a tubing set apparatus and an associated method for separating components of a fluid. The classifications place it in extracorporeal blood processing: separating blood components by differing densities (centrifuging), with multiple-bag systems and flexible receptacles. The recurring prior-art keywords "vessel," "wall," "fluid," "fluid chamber," and "inlet" indicate the disclosure addresses a vessel/fluid-chamber structure and its inlet for receiving fluid. The title and classification indicate a cooperating tubing set rather than a centrifuge alone.
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text contains only bibliographic, classification, and reassignment data plus a list of prior-art keywords. It does not include the abstract, specification, drawings, or any claim language. Therefore this overview cannot state the actual claimed apparatus or method steps, the number or scope of claims, specific structures or dimensions, or any measured separation results. Nor does it establish priority or legal conclusions — the source itself notes that priority dates and legal status are assumptions, not legal conclusions. It also does not establish the identity of any prior art beyond keywords. Those matters would require consulting the full patent document.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:52:18 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6053856. 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.