Cases Updated in CNIPA Guidelines - Eligibility & Inventiveness for AI & Business Method Applications
Polsinelli Podcasts - Hear How the SCOTUS Ruling May Impact Patent-Eligible Subject Matter for Software
On September 6, 2024, House Representatives Kevin Kiley (R-CA) and Scott Peters (D-CA) introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) to Congress. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE) introduced an...more
In cxLoyalty Inc. v. Maritz Holdings Inc., 986 F.3d 1367, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2021), Patent No. 7,134,087 explained that loyalty programs often issue points to customers as a reward for certain activities and allow the customers...more
CXLOYALTY, INC. v. MARITZ HOLDINGS INC. Before Prost, Lourie, and Hughes. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: A claim implementing an abstract idea using conventional techniques is patent...more
After reflecting upon the events of the past twelve months, Patent Docs presents its 14th annual list of top patent stories. For 2020, we identified eight stories that were covered on Patent Docs last year that we believe...more
SIPCO, LLC v. EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The Board’s determination that a patent qualifies for CBM review is non-appealable under 35...more
On June 15, 2020, the Supreme Court issued an Order in Emerson Elec Emerson Electric Co., Petitioner v. SIPCO, LLC, Case 19-966, stating “Petition GRANTED. Judgment VACATED and case REMANDED for further consideration in light...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
While much of the focus of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act relates to economic stimulus, the Act also granted temporary authorization to the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - GS CleanTech Corp. v. Adkins Energy LLC, Appeal No. 2016-2231, 2017-1838, 2017-1832 (Fed. Cir. Mar. 2, 2020) - In this week’s Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s...more
In 2014's Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l case, Justice Thomas famously wrote, "we need not labor to delimit the precise contours of the 'abstract ideas' category in this case." Instead, he found the claims of patentee Alice...more
Earlier this week, the Federal Circuit reviewed a PTAB affirming the examiner’s rejection of claims directed to a computer-conducted method of "assigning and managing the rights to receive taxes when amounts are disbursed...more
Following guidance from the Federal Circuit, the PTAB has vacated a previous Board decision granting Covered Business Method review in Apple, Inc. v. Universal Secure Registry LLC (P.T.A.B. Dec. 3, 2018). The PTAB’s...more
State Sovereignty Principles Do Not Allow a State to Bring a Patent Infringement Suit in an Improper Venue - In Board of Regents v. Boston Scientific Corp., Appeal No. 2018-1700, the Federal Circuit ruled that the patent...more
SIPCO, LLC v. EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Reyna concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part Summary: The language “unobvious over the prior art” in...more
Last week, the Federal Circuit reversed a District of Minnesota decision and found a patent directed to a system and method for processing paper checks to be abstract and not eligible for patent protection. Judge Chen wrote...more
Is the little-used CBM patent review program the key to passage of § 101 legislation? Congress is currently considering legislation to drastically alter the patent eligibility statute, 35 U.S.C. § 101. The unabashed...more
Addressing the standard for qualifying as a covered business method (CBM) patent and the procedure for analyzing the claims of such patents under 35 USC § 101, the US Court of Appeals found that the challenged claims were...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - ThermoLife Int’l LLC v. GNC Corp., Appeal Nos. 2018-1657, 2018-1666 (Fed. Cir. May 1, 2019) - In an appeal from a district court decision, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court’s...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently issued three interesting, related opinions interpreting and applying the “technological invention” exception to Covered Business Method Review (“CBM Review”). These...more
On Thursday, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in Trading Technologies International, Inc. v. IBG Interactive Brokers, LLC, No. 17-2257 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 18, 2019), that provides another data point on how CBM...more
The PTAB recently clarified eligibility for a covered business method review (CBM). See Xerox Corp. v. Bytemark, Inc., No. CBM2018-00011 (P.T.A.B. July 12, 2018) (Paper 12). To establish standing for CBM review, a petitioner...more
In 2014, the United States Supreme Court in a landmark decision in the field of Patent Law (Alice Corp. v. CLS Int’l) invalidated software patents related to mitigating settlement risk. Relying on the now-infamous Section...more
Arbitration - Waymo v. Uber Technologies, 870 F.3d 1342 (Fed. Cir. 2017) - Waymo sued Uber and others for trade secret misappropriation and patent infringement. Uber contends that Waymo should be compelled to...more
On December 1, 2017, the PTAB denied institution of a covered business method (“CBM”) petition because the challenged patent is directed to a “technological invention” and therefore is ineligible for CBM review under section...more