Optis Wireless Technology, LLC v. Huawei Device Co., Ltd.
Patentability filed 2 Jun 2022 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and closed 7 Dec 2023, with US8208569B2 asserted. Recorded basis of termination: unpatentable.
Case record
- Patent involved
- US8208569B2
- Application no.
- US12/901220
- Case no.
- 22-1858
- 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
- 2 Jun 2022 – 7 Dec 2023
- Duration
- 553 days
- Basis of termination
- Unpatentable
- Products & marks
- Method and apparatus for multicarrier communication
- Validity challenges
- 3 on record
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- 01Ranked prior artEvery hit source-linked
- 02Claim-level comparisonAgainst your own product
- 03Legal statusAcross 174 jurisdictions
Method and apparatus for multicarrier communication
A multicarrier communication method and a multicarrier communication apparatus used for the method for adjusting the arrangement in code block units according to the actual reception state of the multicarrier signal, when arranging code blocks generated through error correcting coding processing not only in the time axis direction but also in the frequency axis direction in order to improve an error correction rate of a multicarrier signal.
- Legal status
- Inactive
- Granted
- 26 Jun 2012
- Earliest priority
- 12 Jun 2003
- Est. expiry
- 9 Jun 2024
- Validity challenges
- 3 on recordIPR2018-00653 · Other · filed by Huawei Device Co., Ltd.IPR2018-00653 · Patentability · filed by Optis Wireless Technology, LLCIPR2018-00655 · Other · filed by Huawei Device Co., Ltd.
- Licences recorded
- None recorded
- Inventors
- MIYOSHI, KENICHI · CHENG, JUN
- Classification
- H04K1/10H04L1/00H04J11/00H04L27/26
- Prosecution counsel
- NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC
- Examiner
- TORRES, JUAN A
Parties of record
Optis Wireless Technology, LLC
- Core tech
- H04K1/10H04L1/00H04J11/00H04L27/26
- Counsel
- Brent N. Bumgardner · Christopher Granaghan · Robert Delafield
- Firm
- Nelson Bumgardner Conroy PC
Huawei Device Co., Ltd.
- Core tech
- Not recorded
- Counsel
- Not recorded
- Firm
- Not recorded
Counsel of record
| Attorney | For | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Brent N. Bumgardner | Optis Wireless Technology, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Christopher Granaghan | Optis Wireless Technology, LLC | Plaintiff |
| Robert Delafield | Optis Wireless Technology, LLC | Plaintiff |
Basis of termination
From the record · verbatim“THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: PER CURIAM (DYK, SCHALL, and REYNA, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36”
Case 22-1858 · Fed. Cir. · closed 7 December 2023
Related cases
Three questions this record usually leads to. Each one runs against the full litigation and patent corpus, and cites what it finds.
Frequently asked questions
What is case 22-1858?
22-1858 is a patent patentability brought by Optis Wireless Technology, LLC against Huawei Device Co., Ltd., filed on 2 Jun 2022 in the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The case closed on 7 December 2023.
Which patent was asserted in 22-1858?
US8208569B2 (“Method and apparatus for multicarrier communication”), assigned to OPTIS WIRELESS TECHNOLOGY, LLC, currently inactive. The record also lists Method and apparatus for multicarrier communication.
How was case 22-1858 terminated?
The recorded basis of termination is unpatentable. The termination text reads: “THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: PER CURIAM (DYK, SCHALL, and REYNA, Circuit Judges). AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36”
How long did case 22-1858 take?
553 calendar days, from filing on 2 Jun 2022 to closure on 7 December 2023.
Who were the attorneys and the judge in 22-1858?
Brent N. Bumgardner, Christopher Granaghan and Robert Delafield are recorded as counsel for plaintiff Optis Wireless Technology.
Disclaimer. This page reproduces publicly available court docket data for case 22-1858 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.