Invalidity dossier
US 9565575
Interference avoidance technique for wireless networks used in critical applications
Current assignee: Honeywell International Inc
Added 9/23/2026, 5:35:51 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 9,565,575 B2
Title: "Interference avoidance technique for wireless networks used in critical applications"
Assignee: Honeywell International Inc. (current and original assignee, per the supplied text).
Inventors: Vinayak Sadashiv Kore, Mohammed Rizwan, Gourango Biswas, Andrew G. Berezowski.
Key dates: Priority date 2013-07-25; application US 13/951,116 filed 2013-07-25; published as US 2015/0029025 A1 on 2015-01-29; granted 2017-02-07. Legal status shown as Active with an adjusted expiration of 2034-09-09 (a status assumption, not a legal conclusion, per the source).
Purpose and plain-language scope: The patent addresses wireless security systems whose sensor devices must reliably transmit alarm information despite nearby interference sources — including mobile devices such as walkie-talkies, cordless phones, and RFID readers that may come within roughly 30 cm. The excerpt notes that ISM-band regulations require transmitters to randomly frequency hop at least once every 400 ms, and that wireless security systems must be robust under all circumstances. The described approach uses combinations of antenna diversity, data transmission redundancy, spatial diversity of transmitters and receivers in a wireless mesh, frequency diversity, and carefully selected timing to complete information transfer in the presence of close-proximity interference. Figures illustrate a child node communicating with two parents with an interferer near a parent (FIG. 2), near the child (FIG. 3), and using beamforming (FIG. 4). Sensor devices may be sensors, repeaters, or output devices; they couple to a control panel that may forward an alarm to a central monitoring station. The control panel circuitry includes processors operating under computer programs loaded from non-transitory memory.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9565575/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the full specification, complete claim language, or prosecution history; it does not verify the accuracy of classifications or legal-status/expiration data, and it supplies no findings on validity, prior art, or litigation.
Generated 10/1/2026, 9:43:28 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 9565575. 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.