News & Analysis as of

Covered Business Method Patents Patent-Eligible Subject Matter Section 101

Amundsen Davis LLC

Is the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act a Good Thing? Probably Not.

Amundsen Davis LLC on

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

Weintraub Tobin

And Again, Abstract Ideas are Not Patentable!

Weintraub Tobin on

The Federal Circuit Court of Appeals has struck down many patents on the grounds that they are invalid as directed to an abstract idea, relying on the Supreme Court’s Alice decision. In In re Elbaum (Fed. Cir. 12/20/2023)...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

[Webinar] The Weird And Evolving Landscape Of Software And Business Method Patent Eligibility - March 9th, 10:00 am - 11:15 am CST

The interpretation of 35 U.S.C. 101 has been in flux for over a decade. Please join MBHB Partner Michael Borella, Ph.D., as he discusses its latest iteration, how patent eligibility is currently viewed by the USPTO and...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Invalidates Patent Directed to Customer Loyalty and Rewards System

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - March 2020

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

What is an Abstract Idea, Anyway?

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

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit: Complexity Does Not Necessarily Impart Section 101 Patentability

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Jones Day

PTAB Reconciles Its Prior §101 Ruling With CBM Institution

Jones Day on

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - September 2019

Knobbe Martens on

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

Jones Day

Speech Recognition Patent Invalidated on Multiple Grounds in CBM Review

Jones Day on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently issued a Final Written Decision in favor of Comcast Cable Communications, LLC (“Comcast”) and against Promptu Systems Corporation (“Promptu”) in a covered business method...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Remands CBM Review Decision, Asks PTAB to Explain Meaning of Part One of “Technological Invention” Exception

The Federal Circuit vacated a PTAB decision invalidating all challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,908,842 (’842 Patent) and ordered the PTAB to reconsider whether the patent should have been disqualified from covered...more

Knobbe Martens

PTAB Required to Provide Interpretation of Regulation Concerning Determination of Which Patents Qualify for CBM Review

Knobbe Martens on

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

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit: Reordering Conventional Steps Insufficient to Constitute an Inventive Concept

Holland & Knight LLP on

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

Jones Day

Should § 101 Legislation Include An Extension Or Revamp Of The CBM Program?

Jones Day on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Bear Market for Trading Software: Patents Subject to CBM Found to be Directed to Ineligible Subject Matter

McDermott Will & Emery on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - May 2019

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Framing Your Pitch: A Lesson from the TTI v. IBG Cases

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Affirms Patent-Ineligibility of Claims Directed to Displaying Financial Information on a Known Device

Knobbe Martens on

Before Moore, Clevenger, and Wallach. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: Claims directed to providing additional trading information on a prior art display, without more, are patent-ineligible under 35...more

Jones Day

Federal Circuit Provides Guidance on Section 101 and CBMs

Jones Day on

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

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - April 2019 #3

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co. v. Unifrax I LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2575 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 17, 2019) - Our featured case of the week revolved primarily on the construction of a single claim term in...more

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

Global Patent Prosecution Newsletter - October 2018: How To Do The Two-Step In The United States: The Current State of...

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s Mayo and Alice decisions, uncertainty has surrounded what inventions are patent eligible in the United States. In Mayo and Alice, the Supreme Court developed a two-step test to determine...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Eberra (Fed. Cir. 2018)

Purely Business Method Patent Found Ineligible under Section 101 - In an appeal from a rejection in initial examination of appellant Mark Eberra's patent application, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial and...more

Vedder Price

Overcoming Early Alice Rejections in Litigation

Vedder Price on

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

McAfee & Taft

Two-step analysis to assist in determining patent eligibility

McAfee & Taft on

Napoleon Hill once famously said, “Whatever the mind of man can conceive and believe, it can achieve.” However, what the mind of man can conceive is not necessarily patentable. Courts have long held that laws of nature,...more

Knobbe Martens

Guide to the U.S. Patent Office’s Materials on Subject Matter Eligibility

Knobbe Martens on

Since 2014, the USPTO has periodically issued examination guidance, analysis examples, and other insights to guide evaluation of patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. These documents are available on the...more

58 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