US 9270744

Concise Summary of US Patent 9270744

Patent Number: US9270744B2
Title: System and method for providing additional functionality to existing software in an integrated manner
Assignee: Damaka Inc
Inventors: Sivakumar Chaturvedi, Satish Gundabathula, Rashmi Hiremath
Filing Date: April 20, 2015
Issue Date: February 23, 2016

Abstract:
The patent describes an improved system and method for enhancing the functionality of software applications. It details a mobile device equipped with a network interface, a processor, and memory storing various instructions. These instructions include a "superblock application" that incorporates a "function block." This function block is designed to offer additional functionalities to the superblock application through an Application Programming Interface (API). A key aspect is that these functions are provided and accessible within the superblock application itself, eliminating the need to switch context to another application on the mobile device.

Plain-Language Overview of Independent Claims:

• Independent Claim 1 (Mobile Device - Request-Driven): This claim describes a mobile device with a network interface, processor, and memory. The memory contains a "function block" and a "superblock application." The function block is designed to receive requests for communication services from the superblock application when the superblock application lacks that particular functionality. Upon receiving such a request, the function block determines if an external device is needed to provide the service. If so, the function block establishes a connection with that external device via the network interface, a task the superblock application cannot perform on its own. Finally, the function block provides the requested communication service to the superblock application. All these actions—receiving the request, determining the need for an external device, establishing the connection, and providing the service—are carried out without requiring the mobile device to switch from the superblock application to another application.

• Independent Claim 15 (Mobile Device - Notification-Driven): This claim also describes a mobile device with similar hardware components. In this scenario, the function block receives a request (notification) from an external device for a communication session with the superblock application, which is currently displayed on the mobile device's screen. The function block then notifies the superblock application of this incoming session request, with the notification appearing within the superblock application's display window. The function block establishes a connection with the external device to support the communication session only after receiving approval from the superblock application. Similar to Claim 1, the superblock application does not support this connection establishment directly. The function block then provides the communication session to the superblock application. Importantly, all these steps—receiving the external request, notifying the superblock, establishing the connection (with approval), and providing the session—are performed without the mobile device switching context to another application.

• Independent Claim 20 (Method - Request-Driven): This claim outlines a method performed by a mobile device. The method involves a function block (stored in memory) receiving a request for a communication service from a superblock application (also in memory), where the superblock application requires this external functionality. The function block determines that providing this service necessitates access to an external device. It then establishes a connection with the external device using the mobile device's network interface, a capability not inherent to the superblock application. Subsequently, the function block provides the communication service to the superblock application. The entire process, encompassing receiving, determining, establishing, and providing, is executed without switching context from the superblock application to any other application on the mobile device.

Litigation Status:
As of April 26, 2026, the patent family for US9270744 has ongoing litigation. A PTAB case, IPR2026-00207, has been filed and is currently pending, with Unified Patents PTAB Data listed as the petitioner. Additionally, two U.S. district court cases (2:25-cv-00594 and 2:25-cv-00593) have been filed in the Texas Eastern District Court. The patent family also has a first worldwide litigation filed. There are no specific CAFC 2026 dockets directly listing US9270744 at this time.

As of April 26, 2026, the following litigation involving US Patent 9270744 is known:

1. Damaka, Inc. v. The Cigna Group

• Plaintiff(s): Damaka, Inc.
• Defendant(s): The Cigna Group, Cigna Healthcare of Texas, Inc.
• Jurisdiction: District Court, E.D. Texas
• Case Number: 2:25-cv-00594
• Filing Date: May 29, 2025
• Outcome/Current Status: This case involves patent infringement claims and is currently OPEN.

2. IPR2026-00210

• Plaintiff(s): Cisco Systems Inc
• Defendant(s): Damaka Inc
• Jurisdiction: Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB)
• Case Number: IPR2026-00210
• Filing Date: January 13, 2026 (for Ex Parte, related to 05/30/25, 06/02/25 filings)
• Outcome/Current Status: The status is listed as "Ex Parte".

Proceedings overview

There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US patent 9270744, which is currently pending. The patent owner is facing a new challenge to its claims, and the outcome of this IPR will significantly impact the defensive posture for any defendant.

IPR2026-00207 — Unified Patents PTAB Data v. Damaka Inc

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-01-13
• Status: Pending. The proceeding is in the pre-institution phase, awaiting a decision from the PTAB on whether to institute the trial.
• Judge panel: Not yet publicly available for pre-institution phase.
• Petition grounds: Details of the specific claims challenged and prior art asserted are not available from the provided structured data or readily discoverable in the public abstract for "Unified Patents PTAB Data" as a petitioner. To obtain these details, one would typically review the public version of the petition filed with the PTAB.
• Institution decision: Not yet issued. The statutory deadline for the institution decision is approximately six months from the filing date of the petition, which would be around 2026-07-13.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable; no FWD has been issued as the proceeding is still in the pre-institution phase.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable; the proceeding is active.
• Appeal: Not applicable; no FWD has been issued.
• Defensive value: This IPR presents an ongoing challenge to US9270744. As it is in the early stages, the full impact on the patent's claims is yet to be determined. For a defendant, the existence of this IPR means that some or all of the patent's claims are currently under examination for patentability. If the PTAB institutes the IPR, it will create a period of uncertainty regarding the validity of the challenged claims.

Strategic summary

The patent US9270744 currently has one pending Inter Partes Review, IPR2026-00207, filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. The status is "Pending," indicating that the PTAB has not yet decided whether to institute the trial. Therefore, all claims of US9270744 remain untested by a final PTAB decision at this moment. The specific claims challenged and the prior art grounds asserted in IPR2026-00207 are not detailed in the provided information but would be crucial for a complete analysis. The petitioner is listed as Cisco Systems, Inc., which is a major technology company, suggesting a potentially significant interest in invalidating claims of this patent.

Since no institution decision has been made, there is currently no estoppel landscape established under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). All prior-art grounds remain potentially available for a defendant currently facing assertion of this patent, provided they are not in privity with the petitioner if institution occurs and a final written decision issues. The involvement of Unified Patents in the publicly available "PTAB case IPR2026-00207 filed (Pending)" description also indicates a potential effort by a defensive aggregator to challenge the patent.

Recommended next steps

• Monitor IPR2026-00207: Closely track the progress of IPR2026-00207. The critical upcoming milestone is the institution decision, expected around 2026-07-13.
• Obtain Petition and Preliminary Response: A defendant facing assertion should immediately review the publicly available petition for IPR2026-00207 (available through the USPTO PTAB E2E portal) to understand which claims are being challenged, the specific prior art being used, and the asserted grounds (§ 102 / § 103). Reviewing the patent owner's preliminary response will also provide insight into their defense strategy.
• Evaluate Claim Scope: Re-evaluate the asserted claims of US9270744 in light of the grounds raised in IPR2026-00207. If the IPR is instituted, the challenged claims will be under heightened scrutiny.
• Consider Intervention: If a defendant has a significant interest and is currently litigating against the patent, they might consider seeking intervention in the IPR if institution is granted.## Proceedings overview
  There is one AIA trial proceeding on file for US patent 9270744, which is currently pending. The patent owner is facing a new challenge to its claims, and the outcome of this IPR will significantly impact the defensive posture for any defendant.

IPR2026-00207 — Cisco Systems, Inc. v. Damaka Inc

• Type: Inter Partes Review
• Filed: 2026-01-13
• Status: Pending. The proceeding is in the pre-institution phase, awaiting a decision from the PTAB on whether to institute the trial.
• Judge panel: Not yet publicly available for the pre-institution phase.
• Petition grounds: The specific claims challenged and the prior art asserted are not available from the provided structured data. To obtain these details, one would typically review the public version of the petition filed with the PTAB via the USPTO PTAB E2E portal.
• Institution decision: Not yet issued. The statutory deadline for the institution decision is approximately six months from the filing date of the petition, which would be around 2026-07-13.
• Final Written Decision: Not applicable; no FWD has been issued as the proceeding is still in the pre-institution phase.
• Settlement / termination: Not applicable; the proceeding is active.
• Appeal: Not applicable; no FWD has been issued.
• Defensive value: This IPR presents an ongoing challenge to US9270744. As it is in the early stages, the full impact on the patent's claims is yet to be determined. For a defendant, the existence of this IPR means that some or all of the patent's claims are currently under examination for patentability. If the PTAB institutes the IPR, it will create a period of uncertainty regarding the validity of the challenged claims.

Strategic summary

The patent US9270744 currently has one pending Inter Partes Review, IPR2026-00207, filed by Cisco Systems, Inc. The status is "Pending," indicating that the PTAB has not yet decided whether to institute the trial. Therefore, all claims of US9270744 remain untested by a final PTAB decision at this moment. The specific claims challenged and the prior art grounds asserted in IPR2026-00207 are not detailed in the provided information but would be crucial for a complete analysis. The petitioner is listed as Cisco Systems, Inc., which is a major technology company, suggesting a potentially significant interest in invalidating claims of this patent.

Since no institution decision has been made, there is currently no estoppel landscape established under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(2). All prior-art grounds remain potentially available for a defendant currently facing assertion of this patent, provided they are not in privity with the petitioner if institution occurs and a final written decision issues. The information from Google Patents also indicates that "Unified Patents PTAB Data" is the petitioner, which points to a defensive aggregator challenging the patent.

Recommended next steps

• Monitor IPR2026-00207: Closely track the progress of IPR2026-00207. The critical upcoming milestone is the institution decision, expected around 2026-07-13.
• Obtain Petition and Preliminary Response: A defendant facing assertion should immediately review the publicly available petition for IPR2026-00207 (available through the USPTO PTAB E2E portal, likely at https://portal.unifiedpatents.com/ptab/case/IPR2026-00207 or directly via USPTO PTAB E2E search) to understand which claims are being challenged, the specific prior art being used, and the asserted grounds (§ 102 / § 103). Reviewing the patent owner's preliminary response will also provide insight into their defense strategy.
• Evaluate Claim Scope: Re-evaluate the asserted claims of US9270744 in light of the grounds raised in IPR2026-00207. If the IPR is instituted, the challenged claims will be under heightened scrutiny.
• Consider Intervention: If a defendant has a significant interest and is currently litigating against the patent, they might consider seeking intervention in the IPR if institution is granted.

Inventors

• Sivakumar Chaturvedi (Damaka Inc.)
• Satish Gundabathula (Damaka Inc.)
• Rashmi Hiremath (Damaka Inc.)

Original assignee

The original assignee is Damaka Inc. Damaka Inc. is a technology company specializing in mobile unified communication and collaboration (UCC) solutions, offering products like Collaboration SDKs, Nirvana, Triton, Moca, Amadeo, VCare, Kalisto, and Pacem. They provide secure, real-time mobile video calling and collaboration solutions across various platforms, including smartphones and PC/MAC. Damaka claims to have over 100 patents. As of the current date, Damaka Inc. appears to be an operating company, actively developing and marketing UCC products and solutions.

Assignment timeline

• 2015-04-21 (executed) / recorded 2015-04-21 — Reel 033288/0970
  • Conveyance: Assignment of Assignors Interest
  • Assignor: CHATURVEDI, SIVAKUMAR; GUNDABATHULA, SATISH; HIREMATH, RASHMI
  • Assignee: DAMAKA, INC.
  • Correspondent: BARRY C. HURWITZ, ESQ., 12790 EL CAMINO REAL, SAN DIEGO, CA, 92130
  • Context: Transfer from inventors to the original assignee.

Timeline diagram

timeline
    title Ownership of US 9270744
    2013 : Priority date
    2015 : Application filed by Damaka Inc
    2015 : Inventors assign to Damaka Inc
    2016 : Patent issued to Damaka Inc
    2026 : IPR filed (pending)

NPE / troll-pattern signals

1. Shell-entity transfer — Not present. The only recorded assignment is from the inventors to the operating company, Damaka Inc. There is no evidence of a transfer to a licensing-only LLC.
2. Known asserter in the chain — Not present. Damaka Inc. is not identified as a known NPE.
3. Repeat correspondent across the chain — Not present. There is only one recorded assignment, making it impossible to identify a repeat correspondent within the chain. The correspondent is BARRY C. HURWITZ, ESQ.
4. Cascading transfers — Not present. There is only one recorded assignment.
5. Pre-litigation transfer — Unclear. There is a PTAB case IPR2026-00207 filed against this patent. However, without knowing the exact filing date of the IPR and any associated litigation, it's unclear if the sole assignment (2015-04-21) falls within 6 months prior to the first infringement suit.
6. Bankruptcy fire-sale — Not present. There is no indication that Damaka Inc. has filed for bankruptcy.
7. Privateering — Not present. There is no evidence of Damaka Inc. transferring this patent to an NPE to assert on its behalf.
8. Defensive aggregator (anti-NPE) — Not present. The current assignee is Damaka Inc., which is an operating company, not a defensive aggregator like RPX, AST, LOT Network, or Unified Patents.

Verdict

Insufficient data. The USPTO assignment records only show the initial assignment from the inventors to the original assignee, Damaka Inc. While there is pending PTAB litigation, without further information on the nature and parties involved in any associated infringement suits, it is not possible to confidently determine an NPE pattern.
USPTO Assignment Center search for US9270744

As a technical patent analyst, I have analyzed US Patent 9270744, titled "System and method for providing additional functionality to existing software in an integrated manner," to identify the most relevant prior art.

US Patent 9270744 (US9270744B2) was granted on February 23, 2016, from an application filed on April 20, 2015, which claims priority to July 16, 2013. The patent addresses the problem of adding functionality to existing software, particularly in mobile environments, without requiring disruptive context switching to separate applications. It introduces a "function block" that is integrated into a "superblock application" and provides capabilities via an Application Programming Interface (API), allowing services to be performed seamlessly within the superblock application's context.

The most relevant prior art citations are discussed below, excluding related patent family members that represent the same inventive concept.

Most Relevant Prior Art Citations for US9270744B2

1. US20100058353A1

   • Full Citation: US20100058353A1, "Exposure of remotely invokable method through a webpage to an application outside web browser," assigned to Microsoft Corporation.
   • Publication/Filing Date: Priority Date: August 28, 2008. Publication Date: March 4, 2010.
   • Brief Description: This publication describes a technology for exposing a remotely invokable method through a webpage to an application outside a web browser. A web browser loads a webpage with code defining a method to invoke a corresponding method of an application external to the web browser. The invocation is secure, occurring only if the webpage originates from a trusted domain.
   • Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102: This reference describes a system for inter-application communication where a webpage (loaded by a web browser, which is an application) interacts with a separate, external application. While it provides a way to extend functionality, it fundamentally relies on interaction between distinct applications. The core inventive step of US9270744B2, as recited in claims 1, 15, and 20, is performing operations "without switching context from the superblock application to another application on the mobile device" by having the "function block included therein" (Abstract, US9270744B2). US20100058353A1's architecture, involving a "web browser" and an "application outside web browser," inherently suggests separate application contexts, which is precisely what US9270744B2 aims to avoid. Therefore, this reference is unlikely to anticipate the "without switching context" limitation present in the independent claims (1, 15, 20) and their dependent claims.

2. US7656870B2

   • Full Citation: U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870, "System and method for peer-to-peer hybrid communications," by Chaturvedi et al., assigned to Damaka, Inc. (the same assignee as US9270744B2).
   • Publication/Filing Date: Filing Date: March 15, 2005. Publication Date: February 2, 2010.
   • Brief Description: This patent discloses a system and method for peer-to-peer hybrid communications. It details an "endpoint" which can be a client program on a device, capable of communicating with other devices in a peer-to-peer manner, or through a server, or a combination of both. It supports various communication features like instant messaging, audio, video, and collaboration. The detailed description of US9270744B2 explicitly states that "the function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870" (Col. 17, lines 34-37, US9270744B2).
   • Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102: US7656870B2 provides a foundational description for the types of communication capabilities (e.g., instant messaging, presence, audio, video, file transfer, conferencing, collaboration) that the "function block" in US9270744B2 is designed to offer. Therefore, it may potentially anticipate aspects related to the nature of the communication services themselves (e.g., Claims 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 of US9270744B2), and the general concept of establishing connections with external devices to support these services (e.g., elements of Claims 1, 15, 20 related to external device connection). However, similar to US20100058353A1, US7656870B2 does not appear to disclose the key distinguishing feature of US9270744B2: the integrated architecture where the function block is "included within" the superblock application, allowing these services to be provided "without switching context from the superblock application to another application." The "endpoint" in US7656870B2 is described as a "client program," typically implying a standalone application, rather than an integrated module within another application designed to explicitly prevent context switching.

Related Patent Family Member (Not Anticipatory Prior Art)

• US20150026700A1
  • Full Citation: US20150026700A1, "System and method for providing additional functionality to existing software in an integrated manner," assigned to Damaka, Inc.
  • Publication/Filing Date: Priority Date: July 16, 2013. Publication Date: January 22, 2015.
  • Brief Description: This is a pre-grant publication that shares the same priority date and title as the applications from which US9270744B2 is derived (US9270744B2 is a continuation of US14/024,027, which claims priority to US61/846,958, both with a July 16, 2013 priority date).
  • Potential Anticipation under 35 U.S.C. § 102: This document is an earlier publication of an application within the same patent family and describes the same invention. As such, it is not considered anticipatory prior art under 35 U.S.C. § 102 for the claims of US9270744B2, but rather a related disclosure from the same inventive entity.

Obviousness Analysis of US Patent 9270744 under 35 U.S.C. § 103

This analysis identifies combinations of prior art references that would render the independent claims of US Patent 9270744 (the '744 patent) obvious to a person having ordinary skill in the art (POSITA) as of the priority date of July 16, 2013. The motivation for combining these references stems from recognized problems in the art, such as improving user experience, enhancing efficiency, and reducing resource consumption on mobile devices, which are explicitly detailed in the background section of the '744 patent.

The '744 patent aims to provide additional functionality to an existing "superblock application" in an integrated manner, without requiring context switching to another application. This additional functionality is provided by a "function block" that interacts with the superblock application via an Application Programming Interface (API) and can leverage external services. The '744 patent itself explicitly references US Pat. No. 7,656,870 ("US7656870B2") as disclosing functionality similar to its "function block."

Identified Prior Art References:

1. US Pat. No. 7,656,870 (Chaturvedi et al.) – "System and method for peer-to-peer hybrid communications" (Priority Date: March 15, 2005).

   • Disclosure: This patent describes an "endpoint" that provides various communication functionalities in a peer-to-peer hybrid communication environment, including instant messaging, presence, audio, video, collaboration, and file transfer. The '744 patent explicitly states that its "function block 200 may contain functionality similar to that of an endpoint as described in detail in U.S. Pat. No. 7,656,870". This reference teaches establishing connections with external devices (peers, servers) via a network interface for communication services.

2. US Pat. No. 5,818,447 (Staples et al.) – "System and method for in-place editing of an electronic mail message using a separate program" (Priority Date: June 6, 1996).

   • Disclosure: This patent describes a system where a user can edit an email message "in-place" within one application (e.g., a word processor) using the functionality of a separate program (e.g., an email client) without switching the user's primary focus or "context" away from the original application. This is achieved by embedding or integrating the functionality.

3. US Pat. No. 6,148,336 (Agnew et al.) – "Ordering of multiple plugin applications using extensible layered service provider with network traffic filtering" (Priority Date: March 13, 1998).

   • Disclosure: This patent describes a system for managing and integrating "plugin applications" through an "extensible layered service provider." It teaches dynamically loading and ordering functionality provided by these plugins to an application, enhancing its capabilities. The use of plugins is a well-known method for adding functionality to existing software.

Obviousness Arguments:

Combination: US7656870B2 in view of US5818447A and US6148336A

A POSITA, motivated to address the known problems of context switching, inefficiency, and limited functionality in mobile applications (as described in the '744 patent's background), would have found it obvious to combine the communication capabilities of an endpoint as taught by US7656870B2 with the principles of in-place functionality integration from US5818447A and the plugin architecture from US6148336A.

Motivation for Combination:
The background of the '744 patent explicitly states the problems it seeks to solve: "The manner in which functionality is accessed in certain environments, such as mobile device environments, may impact performance and/or battery life." It highlights that "switching between applications (e.g., switches contexts), the device 100 may have to swap instructions into and out of physical memory, which impacts performance and battery life." Furthermore, it notes that using "another application to provide the desired functionality... is disruptive, difficult to manage, and pulls the user away from the superblock application."

A POSITA, seeking to overcome these challenges, would be motivated to integrate specialized functionalities directly into a main application to provide a seamless user experience, improve performance, and conserve resources. US5818447A provides a direct teaching of performing operations "in-place" within one application using a "separate program" to avoid context switching. US6148336A teaches the general concept of adding functionality to an existing application using "plugin applications" and an "extensible layered service provider," which represents a well-known architectural pattern for extending software. It would be a straightforward engineering decision to apply this known plugin/in-place integration methodology to specialized communication functionalities.

Obviousness of Independent Claim 1 (Mobile Device - Request-Driven):

Claim 1 describes a mobile device where a function block receives a request for a communication service from a superblock application, determines the need for an external device, establishes a connection, and provides the service without context switching.

1. "receiving, by a function block stored in the memory of the mobile device, a request for a communication service from a superblock application stored in the memory of the mobile device, wherein the superblock application is configured to access the function block for functionality that is lacking in the superblock application;"

   • US7656870B2 describes an "endpoint" with various communication services (IM, audio, video, etc.) that can communicate with other devices/servers. A POSITA would readily understand that an "endpoint" or communication module would receive requests for such services. The concept of an application lacking certain functionality and seeking it from a specialized module (like the function block) is a basic principle of software design, particularly evident in plugin architectures taught by US6148336A. The interaction via an API is a standard method for such requests.

2. "determining, by the function block, that providing the communication service to the superblock application requires access to an external device;"

   • US7656870B2's "peer-to-peer hybrid communications" system inherently involves communication with "peers" or "servers," which are external devices. A communication endpoint (function block) would logically determine if a requested service (e.g., an audio call) requires connecting to an external party. This is a fundamental aspect of networked communication.

3. "establishing, by the function block, a connection with the external device via the network interface to support the communication service, wherein the establishing is not supported by the superblock application;"

   • US7656870B2's endpoint is designed to "establish" communication sessions over a network. It is well-understood in the art that core applications often delegate complex network connection management to specialized libraries, modules, or services. The '744 patent itself states the superblock "lacks" this functionality, implying the delegation of such tasks to the function block.

4. "providing, by the function block, the communication service to the superblock application, wherein the steps of receiving, determining, establishing, and providing are performed without switching context from the superblock application to another application on the mobile device."

   • The core novelty claimed here is performing these steps "without switching context." US5818447A directly teaches the integration of functionality from a "separate program" into a main application (e.g., in-place email editing) specifically to avoid context switching and its associated user disruption. US6148336A further reinforces the concept of "plugin applications" that extend the functionality of a host application. A POSITA would be motivated to apply the "in-place" integration methodology (US5818447A) to the communication services (US7656870B2) through a plugin/module architecture (US6148336A) to achieve the stated benefits of improved user experience and efficiency, especially in resource-constrained mobile environments. The function block, being an SDK or independent module that can be "compiled or otherwise included" in the superblock (Description, FIGS. 2A, 2B), facilitates this integrated, non-context-switching operation.

Obviousness of Independent Claim 15 (Mobile Device - Notification-Driven):

Claim 15 describes a mobile device where a function block receives a request (notification) from an external device for a communication session, notifies the superblock application within its display window, establishes a connection upon approval, and provides the session without context switching.

1. "receiving, by a function block stored in the memory of the mobile device, a request from an external device for a communication session with a superblock application that is stored in the memory of the mobile device and is currently being displayed within a display window of the superblock application on a display screen of the mobile device, wherein the function block is configured to provide functionality for the communication service to the superblock application;"

   • US7656870B2's endpoint inherently handles incoming communication sessions (e.g., call notifications, IMs) from external devices. The function block providing functionality to the superblock application is consistent with a plugin architecture (US6148336A) and the explicit relationship described in the '744 patent itself.

2. "notifying, by the function block, the superblock application that the communication session is being requested by the external device, wherein the notification occurs within the display window of the superb lock application;"

   • Integrating notifications into the existing application's display window, rather than launching a new application or context, is a direct application of the "in-place" concept from US5818447A. This aligns with the motivation to avoid disruptive context switches and keep the user within the primary application, a known problem articulated in the '744 patent. Displaying an incoming call notification within an existing application's UI is a common and desirable feature.

3. "establishing, by the function block, a connection with the external device via the network interface to support the communication session only after receiving an approval from the superblock application to establish the communication session, wherein the establishing is not supported by the superblock application;"

   • As with Claim 1, US7656870B2 provides the capability for establishing connections. Requiring approval from the main application (superblock) for external interaction is a standard security and user control feature in computing. Delegating the actual connection establishment to the specialized function block (because the superblock "is not supported" to do so) is consistent with sound software architecture.

4. "providing, by the function block, the communication session to the superb lock application, wherein the steps of receiving, notifying, establishing, and providing are performed without switching context from the superblock application to another application on the mobile device."

   • Again, the "without switching context" feature is rendered obvious by US5818447A's teaching of "in-place" functionality to avoid context shifts, applied to the communication services of US7656870B2 through a plugin model (US6148336A). The '744 patent itself describes providing a "video window for the phone call within the display of the superblock application" as an example of this integrated, non-context-switching approach.

Obviousness of Independent Claim 20 (Method - Request-Driven):

Claim 20 describes a method corresponding to the mobile device of Claim 1. The method elements (receiving, determining, establishing, providing a communication service without context switching) are the same as those discussed for Claim 1. Therefore, the same combination of US7656870B2, US5818447A, and US6148336A would render the method steps obvious for the same reasons: leveraging known communication endpoint capabilities, applying established in-place integration techniques to avoid context switching, and utilizing a standard plugin architecture to extend application functionality.

Conclusion:

Based on the explicit reference to US7656870B2 in the '744 patent itself, and the teachings of US5818447A and US6148336A, it would have been obvious for a person having ordinary skill in the art to combine these references to arrive at the inventions claimed in US9270744B2. The motivation to do so would be to overcome the well-known problems of inefficiency, performance degradation, and poor user experience associated with context switching in mobile environments, as directly acknowledged in the '744 patent's background. These references disclose the core elements of communication services, adding functionality via modules/plugins, and specifically performing functions "in-place" to avoid context switching.