Judge Orrick in the Northern District of California recently granted a motion for summary judgment of invalidity for patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found that the claims recited the abstract...more
In CardioNet, LLC, et al. v. InfoBionic, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s ruling that affirmed a defendant’s 12(b)(6) motion that the asserted claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, based on step one...more
5/14/2020
/ Appeals ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Extrinsic Evidence ,
Failure To State A Claim ,
Federal Rule 12(b)(6) ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Reversal ,
Section 101 ,
Written Descriptions
A federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia granted defendant Amazon.com, Inc.’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285, ordering plaintiff Innovation Sciences, LLC to pay over $700,000 in fees that accrued...more
The Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (the “Board”) decision declining to analyze patent claims as anticipated or obvious in an inter partes review (IPR) where the Board found the...more
2/14/2020
/ Indefiniteness ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Means-Plus-Function ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
Section 102 ,
Section 103 ,
Section 112
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently designated three more decisions as informative, bringing the total number of informative decisions to 13 for 2019. Two decisions—one final and one on institution—address...more
1/6/2020
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Computer-Related Inventions ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Prior Art ,
Section 101 ,
USPTO