Invalidity dossier
US 8789135
Scalable stateful firewall design in openflow based networks
Current assignee: Google LLC
Added 9/23/2026, 9:12:39 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: US 8,789,135 B1
Title: Scalable stateful firewall design in openflow based networks
Patent Number: US 8,789,135 B1
Inventor: Ayaskant Pani
Assignee: Google LLC (originally Google Inc.; assignment to Google Inc. recorded 2012-06-18; change of name to Google LLC recorded 2017-10-02)
Key Dates: Priority/filing date 2012-06-15; publication (grant) date 2014-07-22; adjusted expiration 2032-09-07. Legal status listed as Active, with the caveat that status is an assumption, not a legal conclusion.
Purpose: The patent addresses the tradeoff between firewall security and network speed. Traditional filter-based firewalls cannot detect sophisticated attacks; proxy firewalls are secure but too processing-intensive for large networks; stateful firewalls compromise between the two but still bottleneck bandwidth because all traffic must pass through them. The disclosed system aims to provide a scalable stateful firewall that lets approved traffic flows bypass the firewall.
Plain-Language Scope: A logically centralized controller (which may be an OpenFlow controller) identifies packets in a traffic flow. A first set of packets is routed through a firewall that checks the flow against a predetermined rule; if the flow violates the rule, the controller may block it. If no violation is found, those packets proceed to the destination while a second set are routed directly to the destination, reducing firewall congestion. The controller may route more or fewer packets through the firewall based on how likely a flow is to violate the rule. Flows are marked in a "flow state" or "breach state," and the software-configured switch receives updated routing plans (blocking breach-state flows, bypassing the firewall for flow-state packets, and routing all other packets through the firewall). The predetermined rule may check headers for authorized protocols or IP addresses, or search packet bodies for banned regular expressions. The system also describes aggregate-behavior checks, end-of-flow removal, and topology-change updates.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US8789135/en
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text contains only a partial description and lists "FIG. 1" and "FIG. 2" without their contents. No claims are included, so the exact legal scope of coverage cannot be confirmed from this source alone. The excerpt provides no information on prosecution history, prior art, validity, or ownership beyond the recorded assignments.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:40:52 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 8789135. 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.