Book a demo

Cut patent&paper research from weeks to hours with PatSnap Eureka AI!

Try now
Centripetal Networks v. Centripetal Networks | Patent Lawsuit 24-1473

Centripetal Networks, Inc. v. Centripetal Networks, LLC

24-1473 Fed. Cir. Closed US10193917B2
Get a prior-art report

Patentability filed 15 Feb 2024 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 23 Apr 2026, with US10193917B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: appeal dismissed in part.

Case recordPatsnap Litigation Data·

Case record

Patent involved
US10193917B2
Application no.
US15/827477
Case no.
24-1473
Verdict cause
Patentability
Court
Fed. Cir.
Court level
Court of Appeals
Case region
District of Columbia
Chief judge
None recorded
Trial level
Appeal
Filed – Closed
15 Feb 2024 – 23 Apr 2026
Duration
798 days
Basis of termination
Appeal Dismissed in Part
Products & marks
Rule-based network-threat detection
Validity challenges
1 on record
Source: Patsnap Litigation Data. Case 24-1473, United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Open this record in Eureka
Patsnap Eureka

Check this patent against your own product

Prior art, claim scope, infringement exposure and design-around routes. Every answer cites the records behind it.

Get an FTO claim chart
10,000 free credits to start
Patent at issue
US10193917B2 Active App. US15/827477

Rule-based network-threat detection

A packet-filtering device may receive packet-filtering rules configured to cause the packet-filtering device to identify packets corresponding to network-threat indicators. The packet-filtering device may receive packets and, for each packet, may determine that the packet corresponds to criteria specified by a packet-filtering rule. The criteria may correspond to one or more of the network-threat indicators. The packet-filtering device may apply an operator specified by the packet-filtering rule. The operator may be configured to cause the packet-filtering device to either prevent the packet from continuing toward its destination or allow the packet to continue toward its destination. The packet-filtering device may generate a log entry comprising information from the packet-filtering rule that identifies the one or more network-threat indicators and indicating whether the packet-filtering device prevented the packet from continuing toward its destination or allowed the packet to continue toward its destination.

Read claims and description in Eureka
Patent standing
Legal status
Active
Granted
29 Jan 2019
Est. expiry
17 Apr 2035
Validity challenges
1 on recordIPR2022-01097 · Patentability · filed by KEYSIGHT TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
Licences recorded
None recorded
Classification
H04L29/06H04L12/06H04L12/26
Prosecution counsel
BANNER & WITCOFF, LTD.
Examiner
SCHWARTZ, DARREN B
US10193917B2 patent drawing, figure 1
Fig. 1
US10193917B2 patent drawing, figure 2
Fig. 2
Source: Patsnap patent data + case record. Bibliographic fields and drawings reproduced from the published patent document. Break down the claims
Parties & counsel

Parties of record

Counsel of record

Source: case record + Patsnap company data. Attorney names appear as recorded in the docket. Compare both portfolios
Outcome

Basis of termination

From the record · verbatim

“THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART”

Case 24-1473 · Fed. Cir. · closed 23 April 2026
Source: case record, verbatim. The quoted paragraph is the basis-of-termination text as filed.

Related cases

Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

What is case 24-1473?

24-1473 is a patent patentability brought by Centripetal Networks, Inc. against Centripetal Networks, LLC, filed on 15 Feb 2024 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 23 April 2026.

Which patent was asserted in 24-1473?

US10193917B2 (“Rule-based network-threat detection”), assigned to CENTRIPETAL NETWORKS, LLC, currently active. The record also lists Rule-based network-threat detection.

How was case 24-1473 terminated?

The recorded basis of termination is appeal dismissed in part. The termination text reads: “THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED IN PART, REVERSED IN PART”

How long did case 24-1473 take?

798 calendar days, from filing on 15 Feb 2024 to closure on 23 April 2026.

Who were the attorneys and the judge in 24-1473?

Gerard Michael Donovan is recorded as counsel for plaintiff Centripetal Networks. James R. Hannah appears for defendant Centripetal Networks.

Answers reproduce fields from the case record for 24-1473 and do not constitute legal advice. Ask your own question

Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 24-1473 and is provided for general information and reference only. It is not legal advice and must not be relied upon as such.

Docket data has limits. Records are drawn from a snapshot and may lag the live docket. Sealed filings, amended complaints, counterclaims and post-closure motions may not be reflected. Party names, attorney names and firm affiliations are reproduced as recorded and may contain omissions. Where a field is absent from the record, this page marks it as not recorded rather than inferring a value.

No characterisation of the parties or the outcome. This page reports what the record contains. Nothing here should be read as an assertion that any party infringed, that any patent is valid or invalid, that any settlement occurred, or that any party prevailed.

No FTO or validity opinion. Nothing on this page constitutes a freedom-to-operate, novelty, validity or infringement opinion. Any decision touching a live patent dispute should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent counsel.

Related Litigation Cases

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.