Invalidity dossier
US 7991912
Load balancing of server clusters
Current assignee: Adobe Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 6:08:36 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 — US7991912B2
Title: Load balancing of server clusters
Patent number / application: US7991912B2; application US12/414,306
Inventors: Srinivas Manapragada and Pritham Shetty
Assignee / current assignee (as listed): Original assignee Adobe Systems Inc.; current assignee listed as Adobe Inc.
Key dates (as listed): Priority date 2005-11-03; filing date 2009-03-30; publication of US20090187662A1 on 2009-07-23; granted/publication date 2011-08-02. Legal status listed as "Expired - Lifetime," with anticipated expiration 2025-11-03.
Purpose: The patent addresses balancing the load across a server cluster in a "loosely coupled fashion," so the cluster can handle servers being added, going down, or becoming fully or nearly fully loaded, and so the cluster efficiently balances applications that benefit from connection stickiness.
Plain-language scope (from the excerpt): A client wanting to connect to a distributed application through a server cluster sends a connection request containing an identifier for the desired application. The cluster distributes the message to each server in the cluster. Each server independently hashes the application identifier to produce a unique number for that identifier; the same identifier yields the same number regardless of which client sends it. Each server is assigned or selects a node identifier/number, used to select the server the client will use. A modulus operation may be applied to the unique number to normalize it into a resulting number from 0 to N. The excerpt is truncated mid-sentence at the modulus operation description, so the remainder of the selection process is not established here. The text also describes background concepts (client-server systems, edge/proxy and content delivery networks, and server clusters generally).
What the excerpt does not establish: The full claims, the complete load-balancing algorithm beyond the truncated modulus description, any further embodiments or figures, any litigation, ownership transfers beyond those noted, validity, or prior art. It also does not establish that the listed assignee information is legally accurate.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US7991912](/patent/US7991912)/en
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:42:59 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 7991912. 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.