Invalidity dossier
US 6704549
Added 9/23/2026, 1:32:13 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 6704549 B1
Title: Multi-mode, multi-band communication system
Patent number: US 6704549 B1
Application number: US09/476,330
Filing date: 2000-01-03
Priority date: 1999-03-03
Publication/grant date: 2004-03-09
Inventors: David F. Sorrells; Michael J. Bultman; Charles D. Clements; Robert W. Cook; Joseph M. Hamilla; Richard C. Looke; Charley D. Moses, Jr.; Gregory S. Silver
Assignee: ParkerVision Inc. (listed as "ParkVision Inc" in the original assignee field; assignment recorded to "PARKERVISION, INC." on 2000-04-28)
Status: Expired – Lifetime; anticipated expiration 2020-01-03
Classification: H03D 7/00 — Transference of modulation from one carrier to another, e.g. frequency-changing
Purpose and plain-language scope (from the supplied text):
The patent describes a multi-mode, multi-band communication system able to transmit and/or receive one or more information signals on one or more transmission frequencies using one or more modulation schemes. The excerpt states the invention described is directed to the transmission subsystem, with an up-conversion section implemented using a universal frequency translator (UFT). One disclosed implementation is a Family Radio Service (FRS) system, though the text states the invention is not limited to that embodiment. Listed advantages include power reduction, tuning reduction, parts reduction, price reduction, size reduction, performance increase, greater efficiency, and increased integration possibilities.
Figures identified in the excerpt include a top-level transmitter subsystem block diagram (FIG. 1), information signal conditioning and signal selection modules (FIG. 2), modulation/frequency selection and bias/reference signal modules (FIG. 3), the UFT module (FIG. 4), a UFT switch implementation (FIG. 5), a frequency band selection module (FIG. 6), and an optional output conditioning module (FIG. 7).
What the excerpt does not establish:
The supplied text does not include the full claims or detailed description, so the precise claimed scope, claim limitations, and dependencies are not established here. It also does not establish litigation outcomes, ownership status beyond the listed assignment, validity, or prior art. No research into those matters was performed, per instruction.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:53:02 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 6704549. 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.