Latest Posts › Section 101

Share:

Senators Tillis and Coons Release Statement on Recent Patent Reform Hearings

As we have previously covered, the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property recently held hearings on proposed revisions to 35 U.S.C. § 101 and related sections of the patent statute. Chairman Thom Tillis (a Republican...more

Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property Holds Hearings on Proposed Revisions to 35 U.S.C. § 101

On June 4, 5, and 11, the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property held hearings on its recent proposal to revise 35 U.S.C. § 101, and in particular the current draft bill to do so.  Chairman Tillis and Ranking Member...more

Congress Proposes Draft Bill to Change 35 U.S.C. § 101

On May 22, a bipartisan and bicameral group of senators and representatives released a draft bill that proposes significant changes to 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the law of patent eligibility.  This draft bill follows a framework...more

USPTO Updates Patent Eligibility Guidance in View of Berkheimer

The second part of the patent-eligibility test of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l involves an inquiry into whether certain elements of a claim directed to an unpatentable judicial exception are "well-understood, routine, and...more

Berkheimer Files Response to HP's Petition for En Banc Review

In early February, the Federal Circuit published an opinion in HP Inc. v. Berkheimer stating clearly –- for the first time -- that patent-eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 should be determined as a matter of law, but with...more

USPTO Publishes Business Method Subject Matter Eligibility Examples: Part II

As discussed in a previous article, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently published new subject matter eligibility examples directed to the abstract idea exception to patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 101. These...more

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2016)

Core Wireless Licensing brought an action against LG Electronics in the Eastern District of Texas. Core contended that LG infringed claim 21 of its U.S. Patent No. 7,804,850. LG moved for summary judgment on the grounds...more

Of Technical Tools and Problems: Going Beyond the Two-Prong Alice Test

It is abundantly clear that the Supreme Court's 2014 Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank decision has significantly changed the patent-eligibility landscape for business methods and some types of software inventions. For instance, in...more

Netsirv v. Boxbee, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

A post grant review (PGR) is an administrative reconsideration of a recent-granted U.S. patent. The proceeding is held in the USPTO, before that body's Patent Trial and Appeal Board. A petition for PGR is timely if it is...more

Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Patent owner Electric Power Group asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 7,233,843, 8,060,259, and 8,401,710 against Alstom S.A. and various other parties in the Central District of California. The District Court granted Alstom's motion...more

Shortridge v. Foundation Construction Payroll Service, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Douglas M. Shortridge, the named inventor of U.S. Patent No. 8,744,933, sued Foundation Construction Payroll Service, LLC ("Foundation") for infringement thereof in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of...more

Open Parking, LLC v. Parkme, Inc. (W.D. Penn. 2016)

Every day, millions of people are subjected to a frustrating experience -- finding a place to park their automobiles. Whether at the train station, the sports stadium, a festival, or a popular restaurant, circulating through...more

Section 101 and the Growing Alice Backlash

35 U.S.C. § 101 states that "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof" is patent-eligible. However, the Supreme Court has traditionally...more

Peschke Map Technologies LLC v. Rouse Properties Inc. (E.D. Va. 2016)

Plaintiff Peschke Map Technologies ("Peschke") sued Rouse Properties ("Rouse") for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 6,397,143, directed to a computer-based map navigation and display system. Rouse filed a 12(b)(6) motion to...more

Patentable Subject Matter after Alice: Best Practices for Responding to 35 U.S.C. § 101 Rejections

It has been over 20 months since the Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, effectively limiting the scope of patent-eligible subject matter. In particular, software and business...more

MBHB Snippets: Review of Developments in Intellectual Property Law: Winter 2016 Vol. 14, Issue 1

Patentable Subject Matter after Alice: Best Practices for Responding to 35 U.S.C. § 101 Rejections - It has been over 20 months since the Supreme Court handed down the landmark decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l,...more

Q&A from Webinar on Top Patent Law Stories of 2015

Earlier today, we presented a live webinar on the "Top Patent Law Stories of 2015." The webinar covered seven of the twenty stories that made it onto Patent Docs ninth annual list of top patent stories. The seven stories...more

Motio, Inc. v. BSP Software LLC (E.D. Tex. 2016)

The fallout from the Supreme Court's Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l case continues to reshape the landscape of patent-eligibility. Despite guidance from the USPTO, patentees still struggle with what exactly is patent-eligible...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

McRo, Inc. v. Square Enix, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2014)

Note: This coverage of a district court case from last year provides an overview of the patented invention, as well as the decision currently being appealed to the Federal Circuit. In a subsequent article, we will review the...more

Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc. (Fed Cir. 2015)

Since late last year, the main theme of many 35 U.S.C. § 101 disputes has been whether claims under review are more like those in Ultramercial Inc. v. Hulu LLC or DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com. In the former case, the...more

Ultramercial v. WildTangent -- Petition for Writ of Certiorari

The Ultramercial story is not over. In the latest step of a controversial case involving 35 U.S.C. § 101 that has been ongoing since 2009, patentee Ultramercial has petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari. The...more

72 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 3

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