Invalidity dossier
US 9479436
Added 9/21/2026, 10:34:10 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 — US 9,479,436 B2
Title: In-line packet processing
Patent number / application: US 9,479,436 B2; application US 14/502,399; publication US 2015/0019938 A1.
Assignee: Juniper Networks, Inc. (current and original assignee per the listing, which states assignees may be inaccurate and that no legal analysis or warranty is made).
Key dates: Priority date 1998-08-04; filing date 2014-09-30; publication of the granted patent 2016-10-25; adjusted expiration 2018-12-15. Legal status: Expired – Fee Related. Status information is expressly described as an assumption, not a legal conclusion.
Inventors: Rasoul Mirzazadeh Oskouy, Dennis C. Ferguson, Hann-Hwan Ju, Raymond Marcelino Manese Lim, Pradeep S. Sindhu, Sreeram Veeragandham, Jeff Zimmer, and Michael M. Y. Hui.
Purpose and plain-language scope (from the supplied excerpt): The excerpt identifies the subject matter as "in-line packet processing." Its "prior art keywords" indicate a focus on headers, data packets, data, layers, and packets. The classifications describe the field as data switching networks, store-and-forward and packet switching systems, routing/path finding in switching networks (including hop count/TTL and router architectures), queue scheduling, packet switching elements (switching fabrics, buffering arrangements, header conversion, routing tables/tags, pipelined operation), and TCP/IP or UDP/IP stack and header parsing. Related versions/continuations are noted: publication US 2015/0019938 A1 and US 9,912,590 B2 (priority to US 15/332,883). An assignment recorded 2014-10-02 lists the inventors as assignors to Juniper Networks, Inc.
What the excerpt does not establish: The supplied text contains no claim language, no detailed description, and no abstract. Therefore it does not establish the specific claimed structure, steps, or scope of any claim, nor any prior-art reference, prosecution history, or measure of validity or infringement. Any characterization beyond the title, dates, classifications, and keyword metadata would be speculation.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9479436/en (fetched 2026-09-21).
Note: This overview is limited to the supplied source text and invents no missing facts.
Generated 10/1/2026, 10:01:24 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 9479436. 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.