US 8976714

US Patent 8976714: Providing and acquiring a system information message in a wireless network

Title: Providing and acquiring a system information message in a wireless network

Current Assignee: Integral Wireless Technologies LLC

Inventors: Chandrika Worrall

Filing Date: 2009-12-09

Issue Date: 2015-03-10

Abstract: A system and method for receiving a system information (SI) message are disclosed. A user equipment (UE) is configured to receive SI-window length information within a System Information Block Type 1 (SI type 1) message. The UE determines a downlink (DL) subframe where an SI message begins based on the number of DL subframes in a radio frame. The UE is then configured to receive the SI message in a DL subframe of a calculated radio frame.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1 (Network Element): This claim describes a network element (like a base station) in a cellular communication system. It includes a signal processing logic module that does three main things: creates a system information (SI) message, creates a parameter for the SI window length (which can change), and figures out when downlink transmissions are possible. The network element also has a transceiver that sends this SI window length parameter and the SI message to a wireless device multiple times within a flexible transmission time window (the SI window). The starting time of the SI message transmission, or how long the SI window lasts, is calculated based on the SI window length parameter, the order in which the message is transmitted, and whether downlink transmissions are actually possible at that time.

• Independent Claim 5 (Wireless Subscriber Communication Unit): This claim describes a wireless subscriber communication unit (like a mobile phone). It has a receiver to get the variable SI-window length parameter and a system information (SI) message from a network element. It also has a signal processing logic module that handles this received SI message. The SI message was sent to be received within a flexible reception time window (the SI window) a certain number of times, with that number based on the SI-window length parameter. Similar to the network element, the start time for receiving the SI message, or the duration of the reception window, is determined based on the SI-window length parameter, the order of transmission, and the availability of downlink transmissions.

CAFC 2026 Dockets: As of April 26, 2026, no specific dockets for US patent 8976714 were found in the CAFC 2026 dockets during the performed search.

tool_code
print(google_search.search(queries=["US patent 8976714 litigation unified patents", "US patent 8976714 litigation CAFC", "US patent 8976714 litigation PACER"]))
thought
The user is asking for known litigation involving US patent 8976714. I need to search patent litigation sites like Unified Patents, CAFC, and PACER for this specific patent number. For each case found, I need to extract the plaintiff(s), defendant(s), jurisdiction, case number, filing date, and outcome or current status. If no litigation is found, I should state that.

My previous context states "CAFC 2026 Dockets: As of April 26, 2026, no specific dockets for US patent 8976714 were found in the CAFC 2026 dockets during the performed search." This means I don't need to search CAFC again for 2026. However, I should still search generally for litigation related to this patent, as CAFC is just one court and a particular year.

I will focus my search on "US patent 8976714 litigation unified patents" and potentially broaden if needed, but Unified Patents is a good aggregate source.Known litigation involving US patent 8976714 is listed below:

• Case: Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. AT&T Inc. et al.

  • Plaintiff(s): Integral Wireless Technologies LLC
  • Defendant(s): AT&T Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Case Number: 2:26-cv-00198
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the case number suggests 2026.
  • Outcome or Current Status: Active litigation.

• Case: Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc.

  • Plaintiff(s): Integral Wireless Technologies LLC
  • Defendant(s): T-Mobile US, Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00945
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the case number suggests 2025.
  • Outcome or Current Status: Active litigation.

• Case: Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. [Verizon Communications Inc.](/litigations/by-defendant/Verizon%20Communications%20Inc.)

  • Plaintiff(s): Integral Wireless Technologies LLC
  • Defendant(s): Verizon Communications Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: Texas Eastern District Court
  • Case Number: 2:25-cv-00644
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the case number suggests 2025.
  • Outcome or Current Status: Active litigation.

• Case: Integral Wireless Technologies LLC v. AT&T Inc.

  • Plaintiff(s): Integral Wireless Technologies LLC
  • Defendant(s): AT&T Inc.
  • Jurisdiction: Florida Southern District Court
  • Case Number: 0:25-cv-62546
  • Filing Date: Not explicitly stated in the provided snippet, but the case number suggests 2025.
  • Outcome or Current Status: Active litigation.

Proceedings overview

There are no AIA trial proceedings on file for US Patent 8976714. This means the patent has not been challenged at the PTAB, and all its claims remain valid as granted, presenting no PTAB-related vulnerabilities for a defendant.

Strategic summary

As of the current date, US Patent 8976714 has not been subjected to any Inter Partes Review (IPR), Post-Grant Review (PGR), or Covered Business Method (CBM) proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). Consequently, all claims of the patent (claims 1-15, as listed in the full patent text) remain untested by the PTAB's validity standards, and none have been canceled or narrowed through these administrative processes.

This absence of PTAB activity implies that the patent has not been "hardened" by surviving such challenges, nor has it been weakened by claim invalidations. From an estoppel perspective, since no AIA trials have occurred, there are no statutory estoppel bars under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2) that would prevent a potential petitioner (or their privies) from raising any ground they raised or reasonably could have raised against the patent's claims in a future IPR or PGR. This leaves all prior-art grounds (anticipation under § 102 and obviousness under § 103 for IPRs; broader grounds including § 101 and § 112 for PGRs, if eligible) fully available for a prospective challenger.

The lack of PTAB proceedings is a notable signal. Patents that are actively asserted or highly valued often become targets for IPRs as a cost-effective alternative to district court litigation for challenging validity. Its absence for US8976714 could indicate various factors, such as the patent not having been widely asserted, the validity being perceived as strong, or simply that potential challengers have opted for other strategies.

Recommended next steps

If you are a defendant facing assertion of US8976714, the primary implication of no PTAB activity is that the patent's claims have not been administratively invalidated or narrowed. Any infringement theory built on these claims has not been subject to PTAB review.

Given the absence of PTAB activity, the recommended next steps would be:

• Conduct a thorough prior art search: Since no PTAB proceedings have occurred, all potential prior art grounds are available for a challenge. A robust search is critical to identify art that could be used in a potential IPR petition.
• Evaluate IPR/PGR potential: If the patent is being asserted against you, consider filing an IPR petition. An IPR can be a faster and less expensive alternative to district court litigation for challenging patent validity based on patents and printed publications under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 and 103. For US8976714 (issued 2015-03-10), the nine-month window for filing a Post-Grant Review (PGR) has passed, as PGR petitions must be filed within nine months of the patent's issuance. However, IPR is still an option.
• Monitor for future PTAB filings: Keep an eye on PTAB filings for US8976714, as the landscape can change rapidly if a new petitioner initiates a challenge. You can do this by regularly checking the USPTO PTAB E2E system.

Inventors

The sole named inventor is Chandrika Worrall. The patent does not explicitly state the inventor's employer at the time of filing. However, the initial recorded assignment post-application filing is from Chandrika Worrall to IPWIRELESS, INC. in November 2011, approximately two years after the application was filed by Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC. This suggests a potential affiliation with IPWIRELESS, INC., or a structured transfer of rights through that entity.

Original Assignee

The original assignee, as indicated by the application filing, was Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC. Intellectual Ventures is widely recognized as a patent aggregation and licensing firm (a Non-Practicing Entity or NPE) that does not develop or ship products embodying the claimed inventions. Its primary line of business involves acquiring patents, managing intellectual property portfolios, and engaging in licensing and assertion activities. Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC remains an active entity within the Intellectual Ventures family.

Assignment timeline

• 2011-11-15 (executed) / recorded 2011-12-21 — Reel 027409/0064

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: CHANDRIKA WORRALL
  • Assignee: IPWIRELESS, INC.
  • Correspondent: MARVIN L. BEALL, ESQ., BEALL & WHEATLEY, 400 M STREET, SW SUITE 700 WASHINGTON, DC 20024
  • Context: Inventor assigns patent rights to IPWireless, Inc. after the application was initially filed by Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC.

• 2012-05-08 (executed) / recorded 2012-05-18 — Reel 028211/0002

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: IPWIRELESS, INC.
  • Assignee: INTELLECTUAL VENTURES HOLDING 81 LLC
  • Correspondent: R. ALAN BAIN, K&L GATES LLP, 925 FOURTH AVENUE, SUITE 2900, SEATTLE, WA 98104-1158
  • Context: IPWireless, Inc. transfers patent rights back to Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC.

• 2024-10-10 (executed) / recorded 2024-10-23 — Reel 046187/0572

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: INTELLECTUAL VENTURES HOLDING 81 LLC
  • Assignee: INTELLECTUAL VENTURES ASSETS 194 LLC
  • Correspondent: JILL P BRIGGS, ADAMS AND REESE LLP, 1600 PAYNE AVENUE SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55130
  • Context: Internal transfer between entities within the Intellectual Ventures organization.

• 2024-10-16 (executed) / recorded 2024-10-23 — Reel 046187/0576

  • Conveyance: ASSIGNMENT
  • Assignor: INTELLECTUAL VENTURES ASSETS 194 LLC
  • Assignee: INTEGRAL WIRELESS TECHNOLOGIES LLC
  • Correspondent: JILL P BRIGGS, ADAMS AND REESE LLP, 1600 PAYNE AVENUE SUITE 100, ST. PAUL, MN 55130. This correspondent recurs in this chain.
  • Context: Transfer of patent rights from an Intellectual Ventures entity to Integral Wireless Technologies LLC, likely representing an asset sale to another patent assertion entity.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 8976714
    2009 : Application filed by Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC
    2011 : Inventor assigns to IPWireless
    2012 : IPWireless assigns to Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC
    2015 : Patent issued
    2024 : IV Holding 81 assigns to IV Assets 194
         : IV Assets 194 assigns to Integral Wireless Tech

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Present. Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC, Intellectual Ventures Assets 194 LLC, and Integral Wireless Technologies LLC all operate as patent holding or licensing entities without product lines, consistent with shell companies used for patent assertion. Intellectual Ventures is a well-known NPE. Integral Wireless Technologies LLC received the patent from an IV entity, further supporting its nature as a licensing/assertion vehicle. [cite: USPTO Assignment Record Reel 028211/0002, 046187/0572, 046187/0576]
2. Known asserter in the chain — Present. Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC and Intellectual Ventures Assets 194 LLC are both part of Intellectual Ventures, a prominent patent assertion entity (PAE). Integral Wireless Technologies LLC is also recognized in patent assertion databases as an NPE. [cite: USPTO Assignment Record Reel 028211/0002, 046187/0572, 046187/0576]
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Present. Jill P Briggs from Adams and Reese LLP is listed as the correspondent for both the 2024-10-10 assignment (Reel 046187/0572) and the 2024-10-16 assignment (Reel 046187/0576). This indicates a consistent legal representative for the recent transfers involving Intellectual Ventures entities and Integral Wireless Technologies LLC.
4. Cascading transfers — Present. Two consecutive assignments occurred within a 6-day period in October 2024 (executed 2024-10-10 and 2024-10-16), both recorded on 2024-10-23. The patent moved from Intellectual Ventures Holding 81 LLC to Intellectual Ventures Assets 194 LLC, and then to Integral Wireless Technologies LLC. [cite: USPTO Assignment Record Reel 046187/0572, 046187/0576]
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. The most recent assignment to Integral Wireless Technologies LLC was executed on 2024-10-16. While this is a relatively recent transfer, it is not possible to confirm a pre-litigation pattern without searching district court dockets for infringement suits filed within six months of this date (i.e., by April 2025). The provided CAFC docket information for 2026 does not cover this period.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no information in the assignment records or common knowledge suggesting any assignor in this chain was undergoing bankruptcy proceedings.
7. Privateering — Unclear. While Intellectual Ventures has a history of privateering, specific evidence tying this patent's transfer to such a strategy against an operating company's competitors is not available in the provided information.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The current assignee, Integral Wireless Technologies LLC, is not identified as a defensive aggregator.

Verdict

NPE — high confidence. The assignment chain clearly demonstrates multiple strong signals for patent assertion activity. The patent originated with and was transferred through several entities associated with Intellectual Ventures, a widely known NPE. Furthermore, the final transfer to Integral Wireless Technologies LLC, coupled with the presence of cascading transfers and a repeat correspondent for these transfers, strongly indicates an ongoing NPE strategy for this patent.
USPTO Assignment Center search for US8976714

To identify the most relevant prior art for US patent 8976714, I will search the USPTO Patent Public Search database. I will look for the "Cited By" or "References Cited" section of US8976714 to find the prior art references listed by the examiner and applicant. For each identified prior art reference, I will extract the full citation, publication/filing date, and a brief description of its relevance to US8976714, with an assessment of which claims it potentially anticipates under 35 U.S.C. § 102.

US Patent 8976714 Prior Art Analysis

To provide the most relevant prior art for US Patent 8976714, it is necessary to examine the "References Cited" section of the patent document itself, as these are the documents that the patent examiner and the applicant considered relevant during the prosecution of the patent. The USPTO's Patent Public Search tool is the authoritative source for this information.

As of the current date, April 26, 2026, a direct search for the cited references within US Patent 8976714 on the USPTO Patent Public Search platform is required to obtain this specific information. I will outline the general approach to analyzing such prior art.

General Approach to Prior Art Analysis (as would be performed using USPTO Patent Public Search):

1. Access USPTO Patent Public Search: Navigate to the USPTO Patent Public Search website.
2. Search for US8976714: Enter the patent number "8976714" into the search interface (e.g., using "PPUBS Basic" or "Advanced Search" with the publication number field).
3. Locate "References Cited": Once the patent document for US8976714 is retrieved, locate the "References Cited" section. This section typically lists both U.S. patents and non-patent literature that were considered as prior art.
4. Extract Information for Each Reference: For each entry in the "References Cited" list, the following information would be extracted:
   • Full Citation: The complete patent number, publication number, or literature citation (e.g., US X,XXX,XXX B2; US 20XX/XXXXXXX A1; Journal Article Title, Author, Date).
   • Publication/Filing Date: The relevant date for prior art assessment (e.g., publication date for patents/applications, or date of publication for non-patent literature).
   • Brief Description: A concise summary of the reference's disclosure, particularly as it relates to system information acquisition or transmission in wireless networks, especially in TDD LTE systems. This description would highlight aspects like scheduling, windowing, DL/UL subframe considerations, and user equipment (UE) behavior.
   • Potential Anticipation (35 U.S.C. § 102): An assessment of which claim(s) of US8976714 the prior art reference could potentially anticipate. Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102 means that every element of a claim is found in a single prior art reference. This would involve comparing the elements of the independent claims (Claim 1 and Claim 5 as summarized previously) with the teachings of each prior art reference. For example, if a prior art reference clearly describes:
     • A network element generating an SI message and a variable SI-WindowLength parameter.
     • Determining downlink availability.
     • Transmitting the SI message and parameter in a variable length window, with the start time or duration based on the SI-WindowLength, transmission order, and downlink availability.
       Then, that reference would potentially anticipate Claim 1. A similar comparison would be made for Claim 5 regarding the UE's reception aspects.

Note: Without direct access to the live USPTO Patent Public Search results for the cited references of US8976714 at this moment, I cannot provide the specific list of prior art and detailed analysis for each. However, the patent text itself indicates that the invention aims to address problems with the "current LTE standard in TS 36.331" and the "known process" of determining SI windows, which did not adequately consider TDD frame configurations, leading to blocked or unreliable SI message delivery. Therefore, prior art would likely include earlier versions or related specifications of 3GPP LTE standards, as well as other patents or publications detailing system information broadcast and acquisition procedures in wireless communication systems.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 8976714 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

US Patent 8976714 claims a system and method for providing and acquiring system information (SI) messages in a wireless network, particularly addressing issues within LTE Time-Division Duplex (TDD) systems. The core invention lies in determining the start time or duration of a System Information (SI) window based on the availability for downlink transmissions, thereby preventing SI message blocking and ensuring equal reception reliability in TDD networks.

A person having ordinary skill in the art (PHOSITA) in wireless communication systems, at the time of the invention, would have been familiar with the 3GPP Long Term Evolution (LTE) standard and its associated technical specifications.

Combination of Prior Art References

The independent claims of US 8976714, specifically Independent Claims 1 (Network Element) and 5 (Wireless Subscriber Communication Unit), would likely be rendered obvious by combining the following prior art references:

1. 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 36.331: This document outlines the existing system information acquisition procedures for LTE. The patent itself explicitly references TS 36.331 as the current standard that specifies the procedure for determining the start of an SI window [cite: "The current LTE standard in TS 36.331 specifies the following procedure to determine the start of the SI-window for a particular SI message."]. This procedure involves determining a number 'n' (transmission order), calculating an integer value 'x' based on 'n' and the si-WindowLength, and then deriving the subframe number '#a' and radio frame number using modulo and floor operations, specifically a = x mod 10 and SFN mod T = FLOOR(x/10) [cite: "x =( n− 1)* w", "a= x mod 10", "mod T =FLOOR( x/ 10), where: T is the SI-Periodicity of the concerned SI message."]. It also defines that SI messages are transmitted within periodically occurring time domain windows (SI-windows) and that the si-WindowLength is common for all SI messages and configurable [cite: "The SI messages are transmitted within periodically occurring time domain windows (referred to as SI-windows) using a dynamic scheduling mechanism.", "The length of the SI-window is common for all SI messages, and is configurable."].
2. 3GPP Technical Specification (TS) 36.211: This document defines the various frame configurations for TDD networks, explicitly detailing which subframes are allocated for downlink (D), uplink (U), or are special (S) [cite: "there are 7 different frame configuration types are defined in [TS 36.211] for TDD networks, which is represented below in Table 3.", "D represents a downlink subframe, U represents an uplink subframe and S represents a special frame, such that an ‘S’ frame can be used in both DL and UL transmission."]. This specification inherently provides the "availability for downlink transmissions" for any given TDD frame configuration.

Motivation to Combine

The motivation for a PHOSITA to combine the teachings of TS 36.331 and TS 36.211 stems directly from the problems identified and articulated within the background section of US 8976714 itself. The patent clearly states that the conventional SI acquisition procedure, as defined in TS 36.331, suffers from significant drawbacks when applied to TDD networks. Specifically, it highlights that "the calculation of SI-window and the starting point of each SI-window do not take into account the frame configuration (for example the downlink (DL)/uplink (UL) split) in a TDD network." [cite: "However, the calculation of SI-window and the starting point of each SI-window do not take into account the frame configuration (for example the downlink (DL)/uplink (UL) split) in a TDD network."].

This oversight, as detailed in the patent, leads to critical issues:

• Blocked SI Messages: The patent explicitly demonstrates, using various TDD frame configurations (e.g., Figures 3-8 and Tables 1-6), how SI messages can be entirely or partially blocked due to scheduled SI windows overlapping with uplink (UL) subframes [cite: "As a consequence, the delivery of system information in TDD network is not possible with some of the configurations allowed in the standard."]. It concludes that "transmission of some SI messages is impossible with some of the TDD frame configurations" [cite: "Thus, the above analysis illustrates that the operation of the currently specified SI acquisition procedure in TS 36.331, when applied to a TDD network with different frame configurations, is unacceptable. As explained, transmission of some SI messages is impossible with some of the TDD frame configurations."].
• Unequal Reception Reliability: The patent further explains that even when not entirely blocked, the effective length of SI windows can be reduced in TDD, leading to fewer repetitions of certain SI messages. This results in "unequal reception reliability of the SI-messages" compared to FDD networks, which is undesirable because "all the system information messages should be transmitted with the same robustness as all the system information messages are equally important for the correct operation of the UE." [cite: "According to the example shown above, transmission of SI-2, SI-4, SI-6 and SI-8 messages are more robust than the transmission of SI-1, SI-3, SI-5 and SI-7 messages due to their number of repetitions with in the SI-window. However, all the system information messages should be transmitted with the same robustness as all the system information messages are equally important for the correct operation of the UE."].

Given these clearly articulated problems in the prior art, a PHOSITA would have a strong motivation to modify the SI acquisition procedure defined in TS 36.331 to account for the TDD frame configurations specified in TS 36.211. The objective would be to resolve the issues of blocked SI messages and unequal reception reliability, thereby ensuring proper and robust operation of User Equipment (UEs) in TDD systems. The claimed solution, which involves determining the SI window start time or duration based on the "availability for downlink transmissions" (i.e., considering only DL subframes in the calculation, as exemplified by changing mod 10 to mod y where y is the number of DL subframes), directly addresses these known problems in a logical and straightforward manner. Such a modification would be an obvious design choice for a PHOSITA seeking to optimize SI acquisition in TDD LTE networks.