The Name of the Game Remains the Claim

by Akerman LLP

In a long-awaited, patent-law ruling involving a computer-implemented system, the Supreme Court in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, No. 13–298, 2014 WL 2765283  (U.S. June 19, 2014) unanimously affirmed that the claims in that case were not eligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. Section 101, holding that they were drawn to the abstract idea of intermediated settlement. The Court went on to rule that, whether the claims were to a method, system, or computer-readable medium, merely requiring generic computer implementation fails to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention.

The Supreme Court had previously held that a patent is improperly directed to an abstract idea or law of nature – and therefore invalid – when the patent seeks to broadly preempt the use of an abstract idea or law of nature itself. (Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 [2010]). This test has been described as the “preemption test” for deciding when a patent falls within the abstract idea exception to patentability. The Court ruled, however, that solely looking at the preemptive effect of a patent is not enough.

The Court acknowledged that, at some level, patents embody some type of abstract idea and therefore preempt some uses of an abstract idea. Thus, the Court stressed the importance of using an analytical framework that distinguishes between patents that are directed towards an abstract idea and patents that integrate abstract ideas “into something more.” 

The Abstract Idea Test

The Court then reasserted the abstract idea test it set forth in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1292, 182 L. Ed. 2d 321 (2012) for determining whether a patent falls into the “abstract idea” exception and is invalid. First, it must be determined whether the patent claims at issue are directed towards laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas. To answer that question, courts must ask the question “what else is there in the claims before [them]?” The second step in this test is a search for an “inventive concept – i.e., an element or combination of elements that is sufficient to ensure that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent upon the ineligible concept itself.”

Using this analytical framework, the Court first ruled that Alice Corp.’s patents were directed towards an abstract idea and thus met the first part of the abstract idea test. The Court reasoned that Alice Corp.’s patents were directed towards the abstract idea of intermediated settlement and likened Alice Corp.’s patents to the patents the Supreme Court ruled were invalid in Bilski, which dealt with a computer program that hedged risk in financial transactions. The Court reasoned “[l]ike the risk hedging in Bilski, the concept of intermediated settlement is ‘a fundamental economic practice long prevalent in our system of commerce.’” The Court, however, declined to set forth “the precise contours” of what constitutes an abstract idea and reasoned that the case’s factual similarity to Bilski was enough to find that the patents at issue were directed towards an abstract idea. 

The Court then moved to the second part of the abstract idea test and ruled that Alice Corp.’s patents did not contain an inventive concept sufficient to transform the abstract idea of intermediated settlement into a patent-eligible application. The Court held that the mere introduction of a computer into a patent that recites an abstract idea or law of nature and then tells a computer to apply that idea is not an inventive concept sufficient to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible application. Additionally, for an invention to be an “inventive concept," it must improve an existing technological process rather than use computers in a conventional, well-known way. The Court ruled that Alice Corp.’s method claims merely recited the concept of intermediated settlement as performed by a generic computer and, therefore, did not do anything more than recite an abstract idea and tell a computer to apply that idea. The Court ruled that Alice Corp.’s system claims likewise failed because they merely recited generic computer components together with an abstract idea. The Court ruled that to pass the second prong of its test and avoid being deemed an abstract idea, a patent reciting a hardware component must offer a meaningful limitation beyond generally linking the use of an abstract idea to a computer implementation or a particular technological environment. Here, the claims did nothing to improve the technology or technical field itself, but combined formulas and computer technology that were well-known and already widely used.

Justice Sotomayor wrote a separate concurring opinion joined by Justices Ginsburg and Breyer to add that she adheres to the view that any claim that merely describes a method of doing business is not patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101. While not part of the Opinion of the Court, this concurrence may well act to chill obtaining or enforcement of business method patents.

Implications of the Supreme Court’s Ruling

The Court’s ruling declined to provide a definitive test that delineates the contours of an abstract idea from a patent-eligible claim. Instead, the second part of the Court’s two-part analysis, looking for “something more” than an abstract idea in the language of the claim, is likely to mean that, as the Federal Circuit has noted before, “the name of the game is the claim.” (Hilton Davis v. Warner-Jenkinson Co., 62 F.3d 1512, 1539 (Fed. Cir. 1995) (Plager, J., with whom Archer, C.J., and Rich & Lourie, JJ., join, dissenting) Practitioners are thus well-advised to consider a varied program of claims, with different approaches to adding the “something more,” with the expectation that these limitations could be the subject of intense scrutiny, either by the USPTO during the patenting process or in any subsequent enforcement or licensing of the resultant patent. 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Akerman LLP | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Akerman LLP

Akerman LLP on:

Readers' Choice 2017
Reporters on Deadline

"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 using*

Already signed up? Log in here

*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
Privacy Policy (Updated: October 8, 2015):

JD Supra provides users with access to its legal industry publishing services (the "Service") through its website (the "Website") as well as through other sources. Our policies with regard to data collection and use of personal information of users of the Service, regardless of the manner in which users access the Service, and visitors to the Website are set forth in this statement ("Policy"). By using the Service, you signify your acceptance of this Policy.

Information Collection and Use by JD Supra

JD Supra collects users' names, companies, titles, e-mail address and industry. JD Supra also tracks the pages that users visit, logs IP addresses and aggregates non-personally identifiable user data and browser type. This data is gathered using cookies and other technologies.

The information and data collected is used to authenticate users and to send notifications relating to the Service, including email alerts to which users have subscribed; to manage the Service and Website, to improve the Service and to customize the user's experience. This information is also provided to the authors of the content to give them insight into their readership and help them to improve their content, so that it is most useful for our users.

JD Supra does not sell, rent or otherwise provide your details to third parties, other than to the authors of the content on JD Supra.

If you prefer not to enable cookies, you may change your browser settings to disable cookies; however, please note that rejecting cookies while visiting the Website may result in certain parts of the Website not operating correctly or as efficiently as if cookies were allowed.

Email Choice/Opt-out

Users who opt in to receive emails may choose to no longer receive e-mail updates and newsletters by selecting the "opt-out of future email" option in the email they receive from JD Supra or in their JD Supra account management screen.


JD Supra takes reasonable precautions to insure that user information is kept private. We restrict access to user information to those individuals who reasonably need access to perform their job functions, such as our third party email service, customer service personnel and technical staff. However, please note that no method of transmitting or storing data is completely secure and we cannot guarantee the security of user information. Unauthorized entry or use, hardware or software failure, and other factors may compromise the security of user information at any time.

If you have reason to believe that your interaction with us is no longer secure, you must immediately notify us of the problem by contacting us at In the unlikely event that we believe that the security of your user information in our possession or control may have been compromised, we may seek to notify you of that development and, if so, will endeavor to do so as promptly as practicable under the circumstances.

Sharing and Disclosure of Information JD Supra Collects

Except as otherwise described in this privacy statement, JD Supra will not disclose personal information to any third party unless we believe that disclosure is necessary to: (1) comply with applicable laws; (2) respond to governmental inquiries or requests; (3) comply with valid legal process; (4) protect the rights, privacy, safety or property of JD Supra, users of the Service, Website visitors or the public; (5) permit us to pursue available remedies or limit the damages that we may sustain; and (6) enforce our Terms & Conditions of Use.

In the event there is a change in the corporate structure of JD Supra such as, but not limited to, merger, consolidation, sale, liquidation or transfer of substantial assets, JD Supra may, in its sole discretion, transfer, sell or assign information collected on and through the Service to one or more affiliated or unaffiliated third parties.

Links to Other Websites

This Website and the Service may contain links to other websites. The operator of such other websites may collect information about you, including through cookies or other technologies. If you are using the Service through the Website and link to another site, you will leave the Website and this Policy will not apply to your use of and activity on those other sites. We encourage you to read the legal notices posted on those sites, including their privacy policies. We shall have no responsibility or liability for your visitation to, and the data collection and use practices of, such other sites. This Policy applies solely to the information collected in connection with your use of this Website and does not apply to any practices conducted offline or in connection with any other websites.

Changes in Our Privacy Policy

We reserve the right to change this Policy at any time. Please refer to the date at the top of this page to determine when this Policy was last revised. Any changes to our privacy policy will become effective upon posting of the revised policy on the Website. By continuing to use the Service or Website following such changes, you will be deemed to have agreed to such changes. If you do not agree with the terms of this Policy, as it may be amended from time to time, in whole or part, please do not continue using the Service or the Website.

Contacting JD Supra

If you have any questions about this privacy statement, the practices of this site, your dealings with this Web site, or if you would like to change any of the information you have provided to us, please contact us at:

- hide
*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.