The U.S. Supreme Court has once again been urged to revisit 35 U.S.C. § 101, the statute governing patent eligibility. Audio Evolution Diagnostics, Inc. (AED) filed a petition for writ of certiorari, challenging the Federal...more
As 2024 draws to a close, several crucial developments — some aimed at modernizing long-standing legal practices, others addressing emerging challenges — have reached patent law. Originally published in Law360 - December...more
At the end of October, the U.S. Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) issued a final written decision in PGR2023-00023, finding all claims of a patent owned by Halliburton Energy Services unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101....more
The rapid advancement of artificial intelligence (AI) technologies is fueling a surge in global patent filings for AI-related innovations, but differences in national patent laws and examination standards for such inventions...more
The recent surge of accessible generative AI (“GenAI”) tools has kept attorneys, particularly those in the intellectual property, technology, data privacy, and cybersecurity spaces, on their toes. Within the intellectual...more
Combining Abstract Ideas Does Not Make Them Less Abstract - In Broadband Itv, Inc. v. Amazon.Com, Inc., Appeal No. 23-1107, the Federal Circuit held that when assessing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, combining two...more
In 2023, global investments in energy transition projects surged to approximately $1.7 trillion. This unprecedented investment level underscores the transformative shift toward cleaner energy sources and technologies....more
On September 17, 2024, Judges Taranto, Chen and Cunningham of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) upheld the invalidation of a patent belonging to Angel Technologies Group, LLC and dismissed...more
On September 3, 2024, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision affirming a district court decision where claims relating to “video-on-demand” systems did not constitute patentable subject matter because the claims...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed and remanded a district court’s decision that the asserted claims were patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, finding that the district court improperly characterized...more
On September 9, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) reversed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s decision finding asserted claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. §...more
Before Reyna, Prost, and Schall. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. Summary: Claims are patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 where the written description discloses...more
The Mayo/Alice framework for determining subject matter eligibility of patents under 35 U.S.C. §101 has long since antagonized both patent prosecutors and litigators alike, causing significant uncertainty in the realm of...more
Before Dyk, Reyna, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas. Summary: When assessing patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, combining two abstract ideas does not make...more
On September 9, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a finding by the District Court for the Northern District of California that point-of-view camera claims were ineligible. ...more
The US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently issued its 2024 Guidance on Patent Subject Matter Eligibility and July 2024 Subject Matter Eligibility Examples. This latest update builds on the 2019 Guidance by providing...more
Courts have long interpreted Title 35 of the U.S. Code, Section 101, to bar patenting abstract ideas, laws of nature or natural phenomena. But until six years ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's...more
In the recent decision of Miller Mendel, Inc. v. City of Anna, Texas, 2024 U.S. App. LEXIS 17637 (Fed. Cir. July 18, 2024), the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s grant of a motion for judgment on the pleadings under...more
Before Lourie, Bryson, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California. Summary: Patent claims that merely recite result-orientated, functional language without specifying the...more
Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more
On appeal from a motion to dismiss based on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a district court appropriately analyzed certain claims as representative claims and that the...more
Over the last two years, we have studied the examiner affirmance rates of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) for § 101 rejections. The PTAB is the administrative court of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)...more
Before Moore, Stoll, and Cunningham. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: No live controversy existed over patent claims omitted from infringement contentions prior to a...more
On July 17th, the USPTO issued a guidance update to help USPTO personnel and those who interact with the agency evaluate the subject matter eligibility of claims in patent applications involving artificial intelligence (AI)....more
The murky world of artificial intelligence-enabled inventions requires illumination. Did the USPTO’s recent guidance provide this much-needed illumination, or merely leave a trail of breadcrumbs? Some say the guidance is...more