Invalidity dossier
US 6654933
System and method for media stream indexing
Current assignee: Espial Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 11:12:59 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 — US6654933B1
Title: System and method for media stream indexing
Patent number / application: US6654933B1 (application US09/399,777)
Inventors: Michael J. Abbott, Paul Close, Kevin P. Smith
Original assignee: Kasenna Inc. Current assignee (as listed): Espial Inc.
Priority/filing date: 1999-09-21 (application filed by Kasenna Inc.; priority to US09/399,777)
Publication/grant date: 2003-11-25
Legal status (as listed): Expired – Lifetime; anticipated expiration 2019-09-21
Purpose and plain-language scope: The supplied text identifies the invention as a system and method for indexing media streams, classified in H04N21/00 (selective content distribution, e.g., interactive television or video on demand). Its classifications point to processing and structuring of content—particularly synchronising streams, multiplexing/demultiplexing audio and video, content storage and caching operations, end-user interfaces for requesting content on demand, advertisement data, and "structuring of content, e.g. decomposing content into time segments," including pointers to content and time-domain decomposition. Read together, the classifications suggest subject matter directed to segmenting media streams in time and referencing positions within them, in a video-on-demand/client-server context. The Google Patents listing for the document lists prior-art keywords "atom," "program material," "time," "viewer," and "data," but does not define them.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US6654933](/patent/US6654933)/en
What the excerpt does not establish:
- The actual claims, specification language, or precise definition of the "indexing" method.
- Any embodiment details, figures, or claim scope.
- Any litigation, validity determination, or merits of the listed reassignments.
- Broader family relationships beyond the listed continuations (US6941508B2, US7272780B2, US8015480B2) and security agreements, which are recorded events, not conclusions about ownership or enforceability.
This overview rests solely on the supplied excerpt; omitted text (e.g., claims) may add substantive scope not reflected here.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:32:48 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6654933. 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.