Invalidity dossier
US 6055564
Admission control where priority indicator is used to discriminate between messages
Current assignee: Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP
Added 9/23/2026, 8:25:07 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 — US6055564A
Title: "Admission control where priority indicator is used to discriminate between messages"
Patent number: US6055564A (application US09/038,657)
Inventor: Peter Phaal
Original assignee: Hewlett Packard Co. The source lists the current assignee as Hewlett Packard Enterprise Development LP.
Key dates: Filed 1998-03-11; priority date 1998-03-11; granted/published 2000-04-25. Status shown as "Expired – Lifetime," with anticipated expiration 2018-03-11.
Purpose: The patent addresses communications between computers, specifically applications where one computer (a "host") receives and processes messages from other computers ("clients"). In typical "stateless" protocols — the source names HTTP, Internet Protocol, User Datagram Protocol, Simple Mail Transfer Protocol, and Network File System Protocol — hosts treat all messages alike and process them in order received. Conventional "admission control" admits only a limited number of client messages and refuses the rest, operates message-by-message rather than for multiple-message sessions, does not discriminate between host functions, offers no guarantee of session completion, and typically leaves refused clients uninformed or told only to "try again later."
Plain-language scope: The invention provides a host processing system with multiple classes of service. A "priority indicator" is associated with each message — assignable by the host, an admission control system, the client, or the message's destination — and may be an alphanumeric field or merely the presence/absence of a field. Higher-priority messages receive favored treatment: queues can be reordered by priority, and when resources are scarce, messages are admitted or rejected based on priority, possibly interrupting lower-priority sessions. The system is session-based, so once a message is admitted, related messages are processed on a priority basis. An admission control gateway and resource monitor check a processing threshold; deferred messages may go to a deferral manager, which can formulate a response, indicate when the host expects capacity (via a scheduler), and raise the message's priority for resubmission. More than two priority levels are contemplated.
Not established by this excerpt: The full claim language, the complete specification and figures, the exact scope of claim coverage, the identity or content of any prior-art references, and the accuracy of the legal status or assignee listings (which the source itself characterizes as assumptions). No litigation, ownership-transfer, validity, or prior-art analysis is undertaken here.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US6055564](/patent/US6055564)/en
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:25 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6055564. 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.