Invalidity dossier
US 8337894
Process of manufacturing a solid cosmetic product
Current assignee: Chanel Parfums Beaute SAS
Added 9/23/2026, 11:32:02 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 8,337,894 B2
Title: Process of manufacturing a solid cosmetic product
Patent number: US 8,337,894 B2 (application US12/666,344; also published as US 2010/0183535 A1)
Assignee: Chanel Parfums Beauté SAS (original and current assignee listed)
Key dates: Priority date 2007‑06‑25; filing date 2008‑06‑25; publication date 2012‑12‑25. Legal status listed as "Expired – Fee Related," with an adjusted expiration of 2029‑04‑26. Google notes the legal status is an assumption, not a legal conclusion.
Inventors: Nadine Goetz, Blandine Hingant, Christian Salciarini, Jean‑Luc Lambrecq, Michel Siodmak, Michèle Mousset, Marie‑Anne Sanchez, Hélène de Clermont Gallerande
Purpose and plain‑language scope (per supplied text): The patent concerns a process for making a solid cosmetic product — described in the source as a "makeup" — such as eye shadows and blushers, which typically combine an aqueous or anhydrous carrier with dyestuffs. The stated process comprises a series of steps beginning with providing a composition containing at least one powder (e.g., a filler, pigment, pearlescent agent, or decorative particle) and casting it into a mould, followed by compression of the composition via a support block and presser member, with a liquid‑absorbing membrane interposed between presser member and composition surface; a porous absorbent component (e.g., sintered metal) may also be present. The disclosed aim is to address drawbacks of prior aqueous processes — notably surface "crust" formation requiring removal, product loss, uneven surfaces, and limitations when mould designs or very smooth, shiny cakes are desired. The excerpt also discusses EP‑0 628 393 (foam‑impregnation approach and its limits for water‑rich compositions) and FR‑2 594 409 (compression with membrane and porous absorbent under suction).
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text is explicitly marked "[Excerpt only; consult the source for omitted text.]" It omits the full claims, the complete step list of the inventive process, and any examples. It therefore does not establish the precise claim scope, preferred parameters, or the full technical disclosure.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:53:56 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8337894. 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.