Invalidity dossier
US 8660731
In-vehicle charging system
Current assignee: Suzuki Motor Corp
Added 9/24/2026, 12:47:35 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 — US8660731B2
Title: In-vehicle charging system
Patent number: US8660731B2
Application number: US13/461,060
Inventor: Toshihisa Haraki
Original/current assignee: Suzuki Motor Corp
Priority date: 2011-05-19
Filing date: 2012-05-01
Publication of application: 2012-11-22 (US20120296504A1)
Grant/publication date: 2014-02-25
Anticipated expiration (as listed): 2032-05-01
Legal status (as listed): Active
Purpose (from supplied text): The invention relates to an in-vehicle charging system, specifically one connected to an external power supply to charge a battery in a vehicle such as an electric vehicle (EV) or hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV), and which displays a charging condition by being connected to a controller via a communication line (LAN, CAN, or the like) mounted in the vehicle.
Plain-language scope (as far as the excerpt shows): An in-vehicle charging system charged from an external power supply and a charging-condition display linked to a vehicle-mounted controller over a communication line. Classification tags are consistent with charging-station monitoring/control, identification of vehicles or battery types (B60L53/60, B60L53/65), conductive energy transfer (B60L53/14), battery state-of-charge monitoring (G01R31/371), and departure-time prediction (B60L2260/58).
What the excerpt does not establish:
- The full claim set or any specific claim language; the excerpt contains no claim text, so no claimed scope can be asserted.
- The complete description, drawings, or figures (only fragments appear).
- Any specific embodiment details, hardware/software architecture, or numerical parameters.
- Prior-art references, prosecution history, litigation, ownership transfers, or validity.
- Whether the listed "Active" status or "anticipated expiration" is accurate as a legal conclusion; the source itself notes these are assumptions, not legal conclusions.
- Any information beyond what the supplied source text contains; the excerpt is expressly partial.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/[US8660731](/patent/US8660731)/en (fetched 2026-09-24).
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:31:52 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8660731. 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.