News & Analysis as of

Inventive Concept Test Patent Litigation

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Solicitor General Weighs in on Patent Eligibility Question

The Solicitor General, responding to a call from the Supreme Court for the government’s views, in April filed a brief directed to the proper legal standard for the “abstract idea” exception to patent eligibility under 35...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Dismisses Infringement Claims Because the Patent Recited a Patent-Ineligible Method for Real-Time Billable Time...

Judge Engelmayer in the Southern District of New York recently granted a motion to dismiss the complaint because the patent-in-suit is directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The patent is directed...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - October 2022 #2

Weisner v. Google LLC, Appeal No. 2021-2228 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 13, 2022) - In its only precedential patent case this last week, the Federal Circuit again revisited the thresholds for disposing of cases under Section 101,...more

Snell & Wilmer

Federal Circuit Affirms Dismissal of “Process Automation” Patent Infringement Suit

Snell & Wilmer on

On March 15, 2022, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Eastern District of Texas’s dismissal of a patent infringement complaint because the asserted patent claims were directed to process automation and therefore not eligible...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Repifi Vendor Logistics, Inc. v. Inellicentrics, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2022)

There is a theme running through many patent-eligibility disputes that is analogous to baiting-and-switching.  One party has claims that recite an invention.  The other party characterizes those claims at a high level or...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Mentone Solutions LLC v. Digi International Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Mentone sued Digi for alleged infringement of Mentone's U.S. Patent No. 6,952,413. The U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware found the claims of the patent to be ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Mentone...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Last Week in the Federal Circuit (October 25-29): Taking the Pulse of Another § Decision

While there may have been no public tricks or treats from the Federal Circuit last week, the Court still managed to issue a range of precedential and non-precedential decisions. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP - Federal Circuitry

Last Week in the Federal Circuit (October 4-8): An “Inventive” Authentication Scheme Takes The Cake Under Alice

Even though last week was argument week, that didn’t slow down the issuance of decisions at the Federal Circuit. Below we provide our usual weekly statistics and our case of the week—our highly subjective selection based on...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

CosmoKey Solutions GmbH v. Duo Security LLC (Fed. Cir. 2021)

CosmoKey asserted U.S. Patent No. 9,246,903 against Duo in the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, alleging infringement.  The District Court found the patent's claims to be ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

On the Nature of Prior Art in the 35 U.S.C. § 101 Inquiry

Diamond v. Diehr, decided by the Supreme Court in 1981, seemed to establish a bedrock principle of statutory construction for patent law.  The Court stated that "[t]he 'novelty' of any element or steps in a process, or even...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Sensormatic Electronics, LLC v. Wyze Labs, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2021)

Sensormatic asserted U.S. Patents 7,730,534, 7,936,370, 7,954,129, 8,208,019, and 8,610,772 against Wyze in the District of Delaware, alleging infringement.  Wyze moved the District Court to dismiss under Rule 12(c), on the...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Targeted Advertising Still Patent Ineligible Subject Matter

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that targeted advertising is still an abstract idea and that a system providing targeted advertising must utilize something more than generic features and routine...more

Knobbe Martens

Stanford’s Computer Models – Inventive for Parents, but Not for Patents

Knobbe Martens on

IN RE: BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE LELAND STANFORD JUNIOR UNIVERSITY - Before Prost, Lourie, and Reyna. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Summary: The specific combination of purely mathematical steps in a...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

In re Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University (Fed. Cir. 2021)

The Federal Circuit affirmed a decision by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) rejecting claims for failure to satisfy the subject matter eligibility standard under 35 U.S.C. § 101, in ex...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Simio, LLC v. FlexSim Software Products, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

This decision is bad.  Not an American Axle level of bad, but still quite far from good. Simio sued FlexSim in the District of Utah for alleged infringement of its U.S. Patent No. 8,156,468.  FlexSim moved for dismissal on...more

Knobbe Martens

Claims to Printed Matter Are Patent-Ineligible Only if They Lack an Inventive Concept

Knobbe Martens on

C R BARD INC. v. ANGIODYNAMICS, INC. Before Reyna, Schall, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: Claims that recited printed matter but arguably included an...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Denied Rule 12(b)(6) Motion Based on Section 101 Because Additional Facts and Claim Construction Would Provide...

While a district court in California remained “skeptical” of the patent eligibility of three computer-implemented patents, the court denied a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The court found that claim...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

On the Patent Eligibility of Graphical User Interfaces: Part I

The evolution of graphical user interfaces parallels the evolution of computing technology itself.  As computers grow more powerful and sophisticated, so does their ability to display cutting-edge representations of...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Stupid § 101 Tricks

If we have learned anything from the last six-and-a-half years of patent eligibility jurisprudence, it is that nobody knows what's going on. Subject matter eligibility is a fundamental requirement for an invention to be...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Rules DNA Analysis Claims Reciting Mathematical Algorithms Ineligible Under § 101

The District Court for the Northern District of Ohio dismissed Cybergenetics Corp.’s infringement suit after determining that the asserted claims—which recite mathematical algorithms for analyzing data taken from a DNA...more

Troutman Pepper

Federal Circuit Review - Issue 274

Troutman Pepper on

274-1 Federal Circuit Revisits American Axle & Manufacturing; Case Remanded to Determine if One of the “Hooke’s Law” Claims is Ineligible under Other Theories of Eligibility - The Federal Circuit recently issued a modified...more

Knobbe Martens

Improvements to Operation of an Apparatus Were Not Abstract

Knobbe Martens on

XY, LLC v. TRANS OVA GENETICS, LC - Before Wallach, Plager, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Colorado. Summary: Claims directed to improving a method of operating an apparatus...more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

Sort It Out: Cell Sorting Method with Data Processing Steps Patent Eligible

In XY, LLC v. Trans Ova Genetics, LC (Case 2019-1789, issued July 31, 2020), the Federal Circuit provided another example of a life sciences method claim avoiding patent ineligibility under the Alice framework at step one,...more

Snell & Wilmer

Vibrations at the Federal Circuit: American Axle and the “New” “Nothing More” Test of Patent Subject Matter Eligibility

Snell & Wilmer on

The Federal Circuit’s recent decisions in American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC have not clarified the standard for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (see a previous analysis of § 101’s...more

Knobbe Martens

No Waiver of Patent Eligibility Challenge Under § 101

Knobbe Martens on

ERICSSON INC. v. TCL COMMUNICATION TECHNOLOGY - Before Prost, Newman, and Chen. Appeal from the Eastern District of Texas. Summary: The issue of patent eligibility under § 101 may be preserved for appeal even if not...more

50 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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