Invalidity dossier
US 7237267
Policy-based network security management
Current assignee: Cisco Technology Inc
Added 9/21/2026, 4:03:38 AM
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 7,237,267 B2
Title: Policy-based network security management
Patent number: US7237267B2 (application US10/688,051)
Assignee: Cisco Technology, Inc. (original and current assignee as listed)
Inventors: Ammar Rayes and Michael Cheung
Key dates: Filing/priority date 2003-10-16; publication of application US20050086502A1 on 2005-04-21; patent granted/publication 2007-06-26. Google Patents lists legal status as "Expired – Lifetime," with adjusted expiration 2024-09-07.
Purpose: The patent addresses managing security of a network system, and more specifically policy-based network security management. It describes attacks of two types: (1) an action deemed illegal by the network intended to contaminate stored network information (e.g., poisoning an ARP table via false MAC/IP associations — IP and MAC spoofing); and (2) legal actions carried out at exceedingly high intensity to cause failure, commonly Denial of Service (DoS), e.g., DHCP flooding and ARP table flooding.
Plain-language scope: The supplied excerpt describes a security management controller with processors and a computer-readable medium whose instructions: receive a set of data about a user of a computer network; automatically decide on a course of action based on that data — where the course of action may be adverse to the user even though the data is insufficient to establish whether the user is performing a malicious action; and send signals to one or more network elements to implement the decision. The controller may reside in a Network Operations Center. Decisions may combine a historical parameter (user risk level), current-usage parameters (health level), and network alert state (alert level). A health parameter is computed from entire-network health and individual-resource health and used for corrective action. Figures include FIG. 1 (system block diagram), FIG. 2 (example method flow), and FIG. 3 (computer system).
Not established by the excerpt: The full claim set, the complete specification, the precise algorithm for combining risk/alert/health levels, and the specific actions available. Classification and prior-art keyword data are present but not substantive.
Generated 10/1/2026, 10:02:34 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7237267. 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.