Invalidity dossier
US 6513953
Added 9/23/2026, 8:08:27 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 6513953 B1
Title: Illumination system and projector
Patent number / application: US 6513953 B1; Application US09/510,678 (filed 2000-02-22)
Inventor / Assignee: Yoshitaka Itoh; Seiko Epson Corp. (original and current assignee, per the listing)
Key dates: Prior art date / priority date 1999-02-23; filed 2000-02-22; granted and published 2003-02-04; anticipated expiration 2020-02-22. Legal status listed as "Expired – Lifetime." Google notes legal status and priority/assignee data are assumptions, not legal conclusions.
Purpose (from the text): The invention "relates to an illumination system that splits light from a light source into a plurality of light beams, converts the light beams to one type of polarized light… and superposes these beams of light on the same illumination region." It also relates to a projector that, using this illumination system, "is able to display images with uniform brightness."
Plain-language scope: The described system addresses projection displays in which light is projected onto electro-optical light valves, modulated per image information, and projected onto a screen. To illuminate liquid crystal light valves uniformly, the system uses "integrator optical systems," and a "polarization conversion system" converts unpolarized light from the light source into one type of linearly polarized light. The excerpt references FIG. 24 as showing a conventional illumination system comprising a light source 4120 and further elements (text omitted beyond that point).
Classification (as listed): G02F 1/1335; G02B 3/00 and subgroups (lens arrays, stacked lens arrays); G02B 27/28 and 27/283, 27/285; H04N 9/31 and 9/3102, 9/3105.
What this excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the full claims, complete description, drawing contents, all cited references, or the full FIG. 24 configuration. It does not establish prosecution history, claim scope as allowed, enforceability, or the accuracy of assignee/legal-status data.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:33 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6513953. 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.