Patent US8069073B2
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.
Active provider: Google · gemini-2.5-flash
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.
Proceedings overview
There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US patent US8069073B2 as per the USPTO Open Data Portal (ODP) API as of the most recent ingest. A web search conducted on 2026-06-01 also did not surface any records of Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings for this patent. This indicates that the patent has not been subjected to challenges via AIA trial mechanisms.
Strategic summary
As there are no PTAB proceedings on file, all claims of US8069073B2 remain untested by these particular administrative review processes. However, it is critical to note that the patent has been judicially invalidated in federal court in the case of Lumen View Technology LLC v. Findthebest.com, Inc.. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York found the patent covered an abstract idea and was therefore ineligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101. This invalidation was affirmed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit following Lumen View's voluntary dismissal of its appeal post-Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International.
Given the patent's invalidation by a federal court, the estoppel landscape and the status of individual claims for PTAB purposes are moot. The entire patent, and thus all its claims, are considered invalid and unenforceable due to the district court's ruling on patent eligibility, which was affirmed on appeal.
Recommended next steps
For any defendant facing an assertion of US8069073B2, the primary defense would be the patent's invalidation under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The District Court's ruling and the subsequent actions at the Federal Circuit have rendered the patent unenforceable.
The core of the District Court's decision can be found in the case Lumen View Technology LLC v. Findthebest.com, Inc., Case Number 1:13-cv-03599 (DLC) in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York. The court's finding that the patent covered an abstract idea, specifically "the computerization of a fundamental matchmaking process," is dispositive. Any infringement theory built on any claim of this patent would be directly contrary to this established legal precedent.
Generated 6/1/2026, 12:49:04 PM