Covered Business Method Patents

News & Analysis as of

NRT Technology Corp. v. Everi Payments, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

Business Method Patent Survives PTAB Review - On January 22, 2016, the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution of a covered business method (CBM) patent review in a case captioned...more

Takeaways From PTAB's Fiscal Year Statistics

Since the creation of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board as part of the America Invents Act on Sept. 16, 2012, the PTAB trial proceedings have become an increasingly popular venue for parties seeking to challenge patents....more

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Adds Two More Cases to its List of Precedential and Informative Decisions

Earlier this month, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) added two decisions to its list of “precedential” opinions for the USPTO’s new proceedings for challenging patents under the America Invents Act. The list (which...more

No Second Bite Of The Apple for Square, Inc. – PTAB Applies Estoppel Provision Of 35 U.S.C. §325(e)(1) TO CBM Review

In the case of Square, Inc. v. Unwired Planet, LLC (CMB2015-00148), the PTAB held that the grounds raised by Square, Inc. (Petitioner) to challenge the validity of claims 1-4 of Unwired Planet’s U.S. Patent No. 7,711,100...more

PTAB Designates Previous Board Decision in Westlake Services v. Credit Acceptance as Precedential

On January 12, 2016, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated as precedential a previous Board decision in Westlake Services, LLC v. Credit Acceptance Corp., CBM2014-00176, Paper 28 (PTAB May 14, 2015), clarifying...more

Loser Does Not Pay for AIA Costs

Trend is patent litigation loser pays fees or costs – but not this time (courtesy Google Images). The significant filing fees spent by an accused infringer on a successful American Invents Act (AIA) review are not...more

Judge Gilstrap awards Section 285 fees where Plaintiff’s Section 101 positions cross the “threshold of exceptionality.”

On December 17, 2015, Judge Rodney Gilstrap of the Eastern District of Texas (EDTX) ruled that, in light of Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014) (“Alice”), a plaintiff’s position on...more

eDekka LLC v. 3balls.com, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2015)

As 2015 drew to a close, the toll of the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l decision on software and business method patents became apparent. Post Alice, approximately 70% of all patents challenged under 35 U.S.C. § 101 have been...more

SightSound v. Apple: When is a Patent a CBM Patent?

The Federal Circuit recently revisited a question first answered earlier this year in Versata Dev. Grp., Inc. v. SAP Am., Inc., 793 F.3d 1306 (Fed. Cir. 2015) (Versata II): When is a patent eligible for Covered-Business...more

Intellectual Property Law - December 2015

Down the Rabbit Hole: Trends in Software Patent Court Decisions Post-Alice - Why it matters: In Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, the U.S. Supreme Court held that claims for a computer-based software method for reducing...more

New Appeal decision on computer implemented inventions in Australia

On 11 December 2015 Australia’s Federal Court handed down its decision in the RPL Central appeal – a case dealing with the patentability of computer implemented inventions in Australia. The Court overturned the first...more

PTAB Decisions on Instituting CBM Review Are Based Only on the Petition and Preliminary Response - American Express Company v....

Addressing whether a petitioner seeking a covered business method (CBM) review could file a reply to the patent owner’s preliminary response, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) answered in the negative,...more

Connect the Dots: Petition That Fails to Explain How Prior Art Could Be Combined Can Doom a PTAB Proceeding

While claim charts are often used to compare prior art to challenged patent claims, simply submitting those claim charts as part of a petition to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), without more, could lose your case....more

That’s Patentable? The Far-Reaching Definition of an “Invention”

U.S. patent law provides that “Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor,” 35 U.S. Code...more

Why Business Methods Are Difficult to Patent

Although the general rule (based on 35 USC section 101) is that anything made by humans is patentable, there are exceptions. Laws of nature, physical phenomena, and abstract ideas are not patentable. Inventions that fall in...more

Internet-Centric Solution Is More than Moving Online - eBay, Inc. v. PAID, Inc.

Addressing the issue of patent-eligible subject matter in a covered business method (CBM) review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found the challenged online action patent to be directed to ineligible...more

No Review of PTAB Determination to Not Institute an IPR, Again - Achates Reference Publishing, Inc. v. Apple, Inc.

Addressing a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) to not institute inter partes review IPR proceedings, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit concluded...more

[Webinar] Software Patent Eligibility - A Post-Alice Landscape Discussion - Nov. 10th, 10:00am PST

Join our panel of Knobbe Martens partners for this complimentary and informative webinar to discuss the state of software patent eligibility after Alice Corp v. CLS Bank International. Since the Supreme Court's...more

Is Inter Partes Review Set for Supreme Court Review?

In re Cuozzo Speed Tech., LLC presented the Federal Circuit with its first opportunity to address important, open questions about how the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) handles its relatively new Inter Partes Review...more

MoFo IP Newsletter - October 2015

The Survey Says: Tiffany Is Not Generic for A Ring Setting - Last month, the Southern District of New York granted summary judgment to Tiffany & Co. on its trademark infringement claim against Costco Wholesale...more

Progressive Obtains No Insurance at Federal Circuit - Progressive Casualty Insurance Co. v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Co.

In a non-precedential decision, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed several formal written decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) invalidating the appellant’s patents, while also...more

Federal Circuit Review | September 2015

Federal Circuit Remands Record Damages Award For New Trial On Extraterritorial Sales - In Carnegie Mellon University v. Marvell Technology Group, Ltd., Appeal No. 2014-1492, the Federal Circuit reversed a damages award...more

IP Newsflash - September 2015

DISTRICT COURT CASES - Minnesota Court Awards Octane Fitness $1.7 Million in Attorney Fees and Costs - In the seminal case establishing a lower standard for attorney fees in “exceptional” patent cases—Octane Fitness...more

Section 325(d) Does Not Preclude All Second Petitions - Motorola Mobility LLC v. Intellectual Ventures I LLC

Addressing its decision to institute a covered business method (CBM) patent review based on a second petition, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (PTO) Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found that its decision...more

PTAB Prevails in First Appeal of a CBM Review - Versata Development Group, Inc. v. SAP America, Inc.

In the first appeal of a covered business method (CBM) review, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB or Board) decision, and explained that the eligibility of a...more

222 Results
|
View per page
Page: of 9

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:

Sign up to create your digest using LinkedIn*

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.

Already signed up? Log in here

*With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name. Or, sign up using your email address.
×