Invalidity dossier
US 7523181
Method for determining metrics of a content delivery and global traffic management network
Current assignee: HP Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 7:59:12 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 7,523,181 B2
Title: Method for determining metrics of a content delivery and global traffic management network
Patent number: US 7,523,181 B2
Application number: US 09/909,711
Filed: 2001-07-19
Granted / published: 2009-04-21
Priority date: 1999-11-22 (claimed from US 09/641,746)
Inventors: Eric Sven-Johan Swildens; Richard David Day; Ajit K. Gupta
Original assignee: Akamai Technologies, Inc. (listed current assignees: HP Inc; Akamai Technologies, Inc.)
Legal status: Expired – Lifetime; adjusted expiration 2024-08-28
Purpose (from the text): The patent addresses "determining metrics of a content delivery and global traffic management network." Prior-art keywords listed are: probe, latency, metric, server, service.
Plain-language scope (from the supplied text): The classifications describe the subject matter as: charging/metering arrangements for data communications; network service management, including quality-level-based billing where a customer is charged more or less depending on measured service level; management of value-added services such as web hosting and media content delivery; DNS-based name-to-address mapping and service discovery; and load balancing via selection among replicated servers, including selection based on server parameters such as available memory or workload. Together these indicate a network that measures delivery performance and uses those measurements to select servers and/or bill for service levels.
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text contains no abstract, claim language, written description, or drawings. It therefore does not establish the specific steps, probes, metrics, or apparatus actually claimed, nor the exact relationship between measurement, server selection, and billing. It also does not establish the priority application's content, the basis for the 1999-11-22 priority assumption, or the accuracy of the listed assignees (the source itself labels the assignee list as potentially inaccurate). No litigation, ownership transfer, validity, or prior-art analysis is included here, consistent with the source's disclaimer that legal status is an assumption and not a legal conclusion.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:41:40 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7523181. 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.