Invalidity dossier
US 8630680
Efficient wireless transmission opportunity handoff
Current assignee: Qualcomm Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 10:02:10 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 — US8630680B2
Title: Efficient wireless transmission opportunity handoff
Patent number / application: US8630680B2; application US12/622,097
Assignee / inventor: Original assignee Qualcomm Inc.; current assignee listed as Qualcomm Inc. Inventors: Guido Robert Frederiks, Vincent K. Jones, Alireza Raissinia. (The record also shows an assignment to Airgo Networks, Inc. and then to Qualcomm Incorporated; per instructions, this is reported only as what the supplied text states.)
Key dates: Priority date 2005-03-18; filing date 2009-11-19; publication US20100061342A1 on 2010-03-11; granted 2014-01-14. Legal status listed as Active, with adjusted expiration 2028-02-24.
Purpose: The patent addresses overhead in wireless networks—specifically time wasted when stations contend for the wireless medium. Stations must wait a randomly chosen period before transmitting; that wait time is unused. The invention reduces such contentions by providing efficient transmit opportunity (TXOP) handoffs during an existing TXOP, while remaining compatible with legacy 11a/b/e/i/g WLAN devices sharing the medium with high-throughput (HT) WLAN devices.
Plain-language scope: A TXOP is transferred using one or more bits in one or more fields of a frame or packet. In a specific embodiment, bits in a high-throughput (HT) control field of a QoS frame identify the handoff; only one bit may suffice, or more bits may specify conditions. The frame's addressee typically receives the handoff, though bits may designate a different station. A granting station may impose conditions: where the receiving station may transmit (back to the grantor, to specific stations, or freely), what data types may be sent (e.g., same TID, or same access category as the TID in the QoS control field), and what happens to any remaining TXOP (end, revert, or pass on with or without conditions). These conditions may be combined in one field, set in separate fields, or consolidated into a single combined field. The HT control field may be carried in the MAC header, with its presence signaled via reserved bits in the legacy MAC header.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US8630680](/patent/US8630680)/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the full claims, detailed figures, a complete list of cited prior art, or an examination of validity, infringement, or litigation. It also does not verify the accuracy of the listed assignees or legal status.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:33:52 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8630680. 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.