Invalidity dossier
US 9494822
Thin backlight for LCD displays through use of field-induced polymer electro luminescence panels
Current assignee: Vizio Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 3:37:19 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 9,494,822 B2
Title: Thin backlight for LCD displays through use of field-induced polymer electro luminescence panels
Patent number / application: US 9,494,822 B2; Application US 13/789,392; Publication US 2014/0253839 A1
Inventor: Matthew McRae
Assignee: VIZIO Inc. (original and current assignee per the listed data)
Dates: Priority date and filing date 2013-03-07; publication date 2016-11-15; adjusted expiration 2033-11-25; legal status listed as Active.
Purpose: The patent addresses backlighting for LCD displays. The supplied text states the application "describes display systems that allow for very thin back lighting panels that negate the disadvantages of edge lit and direct LED backlighting panels," resulting in panels that "do not need light guides, diffusers and air gaps to provide even and homogenous light to the back of a LCD array panel."
Plain-language scope: Embodiments describe replacing LED edge-lit backlight panels for LCD displays using field-induced polymer electro luminescence (FIPEL) light emitting devices. The text describes single-dielectric FIPEL devices (FIGS. 1–2) and dual-dielectric FIPEL devices (FIGS. 3–4), distinguished by the direction of emitted light (front only, or front and back). Construction elements discussed include ITO-coated glass substrates (reference 4A, roughly 100 nm thick), an aluminum-on-glass substrate (assembly 1) acting as electrode and reflector, and a dielectric layer (reference 2) composed of a copolymer of P(VDF-TrFE) (51/49%), generally spin coated. Listed applications include televisions, computer and tablet displays, mobile devices, instrument displays, large commercial displays, and add-on lighting.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9494822/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the full claim language, the complete written description, or the drawings. It does not establish prosecution history, examiner citations, or prior-art comparisons. Claim scope, validity, enforceability, and the accuracy of the listed legal status, assignee, or dates are not established by this excerpt.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:51:27 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 9494822. 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.