The esteemed authors of Patent Docs have written of the need to reconsider the Federal Circuit's approach to section 101 eligibility, given the court's latest expansion and en-banc vote on subject-matter eligibility in AAM v....more
Patent eligibility is a bit of a mess these days. Ever since the Supreme Court handed down the Alice v. CLS Bank decision six years ago, the distinction between what might be subject matter that can be patented and what is...more
Post-Alice, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“PTO”) is aggressively rejecting software claims under the Alice two-part test, the parameters of which many examiners are still trying to understand. Not...more
My last post focused on definitions for the terms “well-understood,” “routine,” and “conventional”—or W-URC—from the subject matter eligibility test set forth in Mayo and further described in Alice. Those terms relate to one...more
Do you remember obviousness before KSR v. Teleflex? To invalidate, the rule went, one must find an express rationale for combining references (a teaching, suggestion or motivation). ...more
In Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al., the Federal Circuit offered rare guidance on the contours of patent eligible subject matter under § 101. The two related asserted patents, both entitled...more
On January 10, 2018, the Federal Circuit added Finjan, Inc. v. Blue Coat Sys., Inc., No. 2016-2520 (Fed. Cir.), to its Enfish jurisprudence and upheld the subject matter eligibility of a software patent directed to...more
After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 11th annual list of top patent stories. For 2017, we identified nineteen stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more
At a recent Knobbe Martens and Bugnion SpA Seminar, Vlad Teplitskiy presented on patentable subject matter in the U.S. ...more
It has now been over three years since the U.S. Supreme Court handed down its transformative patent decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. During that time, the Federal Circuit has issued only a precious few decisions upholding...more
The Federal Circuit recently decided a patent subject-matter eligibility case relating to computer memory in Visual Memory LLC v. Nvidia Corp. In a divided opinion, the Federal Circuit reversed the district court and held...more
The fate of subject matter eligibility is far from certain today; however, there are a few application drafting takeaways from the Visual Memory case that can help in getting computer implemented inventions to allowance...more
On August 4, 2017, the U.S. District Court in the District of Massachusetts found U.S. patent 7267820 (the ‘820 patent), owned by Athena Diagnostics, Inc., to be directed to non-patentable subject matter, and therefore...more
Visual Memory v. Nvidia reverses the grant of a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), ruling that the claims recite an enhanced computer memory system and not an abstract idea under § 101. In Georgetown Rail v. Holland, the...more
In Nichia the Circuit affirms the denial of a permanent injunction because Nichia failed to prove irreparable injury. In RecogniCorp the panel throws out as not being directed to patentable subject matter claims directed to...more
Recognicorp, owner of U.S. Patent No. 8,005,303, sued Nintendo for infringement in the U.S. District Court for the District of Oregon. After a transfer to the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington and...more
In 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court established the current framework for determining patent-eligible subject matter in Alice. The Alice framework is a two-part test, with step one requiring a determination regarding whether a...more
Software Patent Directed to Pairing Activity Trackers to a Device Considered Patent-Eligible - In the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California (San Jose Division), Fitbit, Inc., sued Aliphcom (d/b/a...more
In Zircore, LLC v. Straumann Manufacturing, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2017), as in many patent litigations since Mayo, Myriad, and Alice, the defendant moved to dismiss the infringement allegations contending that the patents in suit...more
In recent years, software patents have come under fire from legislation (the American Invents Act) that has generally made patents easier to invalidate, and from court decisions (the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice v. CLS...more
Addressing issues of claim construction and obviousness, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB’s or Board’s) constructions and invalidity rulings, clearing the way...more
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati is pleased to present its 2016 Patent Litigation Year in Review. WSGR’s patent litigation practice is nationwide in scope and has received national recognition in recent years, with our...more
As technologies advance, the Patent Office (as well as the Nation’s courts) must utilize Section 101 of the Patent Act to place reasonable limitations on patent eligibility to ensure that our patent system balances the...more
In the wake of Alice the waters of eligibility under section 101 can be challenging to navigate, and particularly so for those seeking to obtain or enforce software patents. A two-part test for eligibility is the standard,...more
Since the Supreme Court decided Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l in 2014, patent practitioners and the courts alike have struggled to find clarity in the patent eligibility framework of 35 U.S.C. § 101. For the Federal Circuit...more