Invalidity dossier
US 9836424
General input/output architecture, protocol and related methods to implement flow control
Current assignee: Intel Corp
Added 9/21/2026, 1:08:30 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 9,836,424 B2
Title: "General input/output architecture, protocol and related methods to implement flow control."
Assignee: Intel Corp (listed as both original and current assignee in the source; the source notes listed assignees may be inaccurate).
Key dates (as stated in the source, some flagged as assumptions): Priority date 2001-08-24 (assumed, claimed from application US10/227,601); filing date 2013-12-30 (application US14/144,309); publication date 2017-12-05; adjusted expiration 2023-05-03. Legal status shown: "Expired - Fee Related."
Inventor(s): Jasmin Ajanovic, David Harriman, Blaise Fanning, David Lee.
Purpose and plain-language scope: The patent describes an enhanced general input/output (EGIO) bus architecture, protocol, and methods, with particular focus on implementing flow control between elements. Per the source, computing appliances rely on general purpose input/output bus architectures to let components (processors, memory, switches, peripherals, end-points) communicate. The described EGIO architecture includes elements such as a root complex, switches, and end-points linked by serial communication channels using an EGIO protocol stack comprising a physical layer, a data link layer, and a transaction layer. Disclosed features include virtual communication channels, tailer-based error forwarding, support for legacy PCI-based devices and interrupts, multiple request/response types, flow control, and data integrity management (see, e.g., FIG. 6, flow control; FIG. 7, data integrity). Configuration is described as occurring at initialization or upon hot-plug connection. Prior-art keywords listed include transmitter, data, credits, register, and layer, suggesting credit-based flow control terminology.
Source: https://patents.google.com/patent/US9836424/en
What the excerpt does not establish: It does not provide the actual claim language, detailed embodiments of the flow-control mechanism, the full specification text, or figures. Dates marked as assumptions, legal status, and assignee accuracy are expressly disclaimed in the source. No litigation, ownership-transfer, validity, or prior-art analysis is included.
Generated 10/1/2026, 10:00:53 PM
Cases on file (0)
Specific litigation cases in our database that name US patent 9836424. 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.