5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
5 Key Takeaways | Hot Topics in Biopharma
Podcast: The Briefing - A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Nota Bene Episode 99: Unpacking the Pendulum of American Patent Policy Then, Now, and Forward with Rob Masters
IP(DC) Podcast: Patent Battles – New Patent Initiatives on the Hill & Notable CAFC/SCOTUS Decisions
Podcast: Patentable Subject Matter in 2019
Compiling Successful IP Solutions for Software Developers
Drafting Software Patents In A Post-Alice World
This article discusses the February 13, 2024 guidance issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) regarding the inventorship of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted inventions. While this guidance marks a...more
The Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to storing and providing medical images over the web as “virtual views” were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they involved nothing more than “converting data and...more
In 2014, the Supreme Court upended U.S. patent law in the landmark ruling for Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International. The Alice decision established new standards for determining whether inventions, especially those related...more
Chewy, Inc. v. International Business Machines Corporation - Before Moore, Chief Judge, Stoll and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York....more
The USPTO published its new “Inventorship Guidance for AI-assisted Inventions” on the Federal Register on February 13, 2024. This new guidance was in part a response to the Federal Circuit’s Thaler decision, which ruled that...more
Innovators seeking patent protection for entertainment software inventions should be aware that all software inventions face patent-eligibility issues. Nevertheless, patent practitioners who are experienced in the art of...more
Avoiding § 101 Eligibility Issues in Internet-Centric Method Claims - In Weisner v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 21-2228, the Federal Circuit held that the specific implementation of an abstract idea, such as improving Internet...more
Summary: A patentee’s allegation that computer method claims made data analysis more efficient, without reference to the function or operation of the computer itself, was not sufficient to overcome a challenge under 35 U.S.C....more
On August 2, 2022, Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act of 2022 (S. 4734) (“PERA”). Senator Tillis characterized the bill to “restore patent eligibility to important inventions across...more
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently issued a study entitled “Patent eligible subject matter: Public views on the current jurisprudence in the United States.” The report was prepared in response to a...more
Judge Orrick in the Northern District of California recently granted a motion for judgment on the pleadings that the asserted claims are invalid for claiming patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The...more
In the case USADATA Inc. v. DataWidget LLC, No. CV-21-00526-PHX-DLR, 2021 WL 5084283 (D. Ariz. Nov. 1, 2021), the patent at issue is titled, "System and Method for Selling Customer-Specific Data Subsets on a Third-Party...more
For the first time since 2020, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion finding claims of a computer-related invention to be eligible. Although designated as non-precedential, the case may signal a key claim feature that the...more
COSMOKEY SOLUTIONS GMBH & CO. KG V. DUO SECURITY LLC - Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Patent claims directed to...more
UNIVERSAL SECURE REGISTRY LLC v. APPLE INC. Before Taranto, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee’s reference to existing known methods and techniques in...more
Electronic Gaming Patents Found Invalid under § 101 - In the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Houston Division), Plaintiff Epic Tech, LLC (a seller of so-called "sweepstakes games") sued...more
Bot M8 LLC, a patent assertion entity, was unsuccessful in its effort to have the Federal Circuit reverse the lower court’s invalidity finding related to one of six different patents asserted against Sony in Northern District...more
A district court in the Eastern District of Texas granted a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss computer-implemented claims as patent-ineligible abstract ideas under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Patent is directed to credentialing...more
FREE STREAM MEDIA CORP. v. ALPHONSO INC. Before Judges Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California - Summary: Patent claims were directed to an abstract...more
On March 11, 2021, in an Opinion by Judge Reyna, along with Chief Judge Prost and Judge Lourie, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that the rejected claims of a patent application...more
Signal Processing Claims for Decrypting Encrypted Information Found Patent Ineligible - Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division ruled that Defendant Apple, Inc. (hereinafter...more
SIMIO, LLC V. FLEXSIM SOFTWARE PRODUCTS, INC. Before Prost, Clevenger, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah. Summary: A claim whose only inventive concept is the applications...more
This decision is bad. Not an American Axle level of bad, but still quite far from good. Simio sued FlexSim in the District of Utah for alleged infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 8,156,468. FlexSim moved for dismissal on...more
Karamelion has asserted its two patents more than 40 times since the summer of 2018, typically settling the cases prior to a responsive pleading. This activity will have to go on hold, at least for the time being, as the U.S....more
One of the more intellectually dishonest aspects of current patent eligibility law is that it allows one to ignore certain claim elements when evaluating claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In Mayo v. Prometheus, it was stated...more