ThroughPuter v. Microsoft: Federal Circuit Affirms in Task Scheduling Patent Dispute
What would you like to do next?
Choose your path based on your current needs:
📋 Case Summary
| Case Name | ThroughPuter, Inc. v. Microsoft Co. |
| Case Number | 24-1179 (Fed. Cir.) |
| Court | Federal Circuit, Appeal from D.C. Circuit |
| Duration | Nov 2023 – Jan 2025 1 year 1 month |
| Outcome | Defendant Win – Affirmed |
| Patents at Issue | |
| Accused Products | Microsoft’s task scheduling to configurable processing cores (e.g., Azure) |
Case Overview
The Parties
⚖️ Plaintiff
Technology innovator with a focused intellectual property portfolio on parallel processing systems and dynamic task management across configurable hardware architectures.
🛡️ Defendant
Dominant force in cloud computing (Azure), enterprise software, and hardware systems, maintaining a sophisticated IP litigation infrastructure.
The Patent at Issue
This landmark case involved US Patent No. 9,424,090 B2, which covers technology for scheduling tasks to configurable processing cores based on task requirements and specifications—a foundational area within modern cloud computing and parallel processing architecture.
- • US9424090B2 — Methods and systems for scheduling computational tasks to processing cores dynamically, based on specific task requirements and operational specifications.
Developing cloud infrastructure?
Check if your task scheduling solutions might infringe this or related patents.
The Verdict & Legal Analysis
Outcome
The Federal Circuit issued a clear disposition: AFFIRMED. The court’s order states: “THIS CAUSE having been considered, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: AFFIRMED.” The basis of termination is recorded as Appeal Dismissed, confirming that ThroughPuter’s appellate challenge did not succeed in overturning the lower tribunal’s findings.
Verdict Cause Analysis
The **verdict cause is identified as an Infringement Action**, meaning ThroughPuter initiated this litigation asserting that Microsoft’s configurable processing core scheduling functionality infringed one or more claims of US9424090B2.
At the Federal Circuit level, affirmances in patent infringement appeals most commonly turn on one or more of the following legal issues:
- • Claim construction: The interpretation of patent claim language is a question of law reviewed de novo.
- • Non-infringement findings: Factual findings of non-infringement reviewed for clear error are difficult to overturn.
- • Invalidity: Microsoft may have successfully challenged claim validity under §102 (anticipation) or §103 (obviousness) grounds.
Filing a patent for task scheduling?
Learn from this case. Use AI to draft stronger claims that can withstand litigation.
Power Your Patent Strategy with Eureka IP
From novelty searches to patent drafting, Eureka’s AI-powered tools help you navigate the patent landscape with confidence.
⚠️ Freedom to Operate (FTO) Analysis
This case highlights critical IP risks in configurable computing and task scheduling. Choose your next step:
📋 Understand This Case’s Impact
Learn about the specific risks and implications from this litigation.
- Identify related patents in the dynamic resource allocation space
- See which companies are most active in configurable computing IP
- Understand Federal Circuit claim construction patterns
🔍 Check My Product’s Risk
Run a comprehensive FTO analysis for your own technology or product.
- Input your product description or technical features
- AI identifies potentially blocking patents
- Get actionable risk assessment report
High Risk Area
Task scheduling in configurable processing cores
Related Patents
In dynamic resource allocation space
FTO Best Practices
Prioritize claim construction positions
✅ Key Takeaways
For Patent Attorneys & Litigators
Federal Circuit affirmed in ThroughPuter v. Microsoft (Case No. 24-1179) on an infringement action involving task scheduling patent US9424090B2.
Search related case law →Appellate affirmances in configurable computing patents hinge critically on claim construction—invest in lower court record development.
Explore precedents →For R&D Leaders
Conduct FTO analysis for configurable core scheduling implementations referencing Federal Circuit claim construction positions.
Start FTO analysis for my product →Document design choices that differentiate from US9424090B2 claim language to support future non-infringement positions.
Try AI patent drafting →Ready to Strengthen Your Patent Strategy?
Join thousands of IP professionals using Eureka to conduct prior art searches, draft patents, and analyze competitive landscapes.