News & Analysis as of

Motion to Dismiss Patent Litigation Section 101

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Ruling Clarifies Section 101 Procedures

WilmerHale on

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

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidation of Patents Manipulating Medical Imaging Data as Abstract

The Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to storing and providing medical images over the web as “virtual views” were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they involved nothing more than “converting data and...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Struggling to Master the Alice Two-Step: Search Result Display Ineligible for Patent Protection

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a lawsuit involving two software patents directed toward enhancements to search result displays, finding that both patents claimed...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Should This Be an Alice Two-Step or a Section 112 Enablement Waltz?

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a lawsuit for lack of subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 based on an Alice two-step analysis, with Judge Newman filing a sharp dissent...more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Sanderling Management v. Snap Inc. No. 21-2173 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 12, 2023) Alice – 35 U.S.C. § 101

This case addresses patent eligibility under Alice and whether the district court should have afforded the patent owner leave to amend its complaint. Background - Sanderling asserted three patents sharing a common...more

McDermott Will & Emery

Invoking Generic Need for Claim Construction Won’t Avoid § 101 Dismissal

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a patent infringement suit on § 101 grounds, rejecting the patentee’s argument that claim construction or discovery was required before assessing...more

BakerHostetler

The Judicial Response to Eligibility Post-Hantz

BakerHostetler on

On March 20, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a short non-precedential opinion that, among other things, found that a motion to dismiss based on patent ineligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101...more

McDermott Will & Emery

The Alice Eligibility Two-Step Dance Continues

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) motion, holding that patent claims directed to abstract ideas and lacking inventive steps that transform...more

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Is the Pendulum Swinging? Two Patentable Subject Matter Dismissals at the Motion to Dismiss Stage

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

The seminal Alice v. CLS Bank lawsuit provided an arsenal of invalidation weapons for patent defendants across the country. Alice was particularly relevant to software patents because it held a large swath of software patents...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

Knobbe Martens

Avoiding § 101 Eligibility Issues in Internet-Centric Method Claims

Knobbe Martens on

WEISNER v. GOOGLE LLC - Before Stoll, Reyna, and Hughes, Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. Summary: The specific implementation of an abstract idea, such as improving...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Granted Dismissal Because the Patent Recited a Patent-Ineligible Abstract Idea of Processing and Transmitting Data

Chief Judge Lynn in the Northern District of Texas recently granted a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss a complaint alleging patent infringement because the claim-at-issue recites patent-ineligible subject matter under 35...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

Delaware Court Denies Motion to Dismiss NPE’s Direct Infringement Claims Despite Sparse Allegations

Womble Bond Dickinson on

The number of Non-Practicing Entities (NPE) cases has increased in Delaware by almost 10% over the last year. If you or a client finds yourself the target of an NPE patent litigation suit, the next question is usually what...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

The Eastern District of Texas Granted a Rule 12(b)(6) Dismissal Because the Asserted Patent Was Directed to the Patent-Ineligible...

A district court in the Eastern District of Texas granted a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss computer-implemented claims as patent-ineligible abstract ideas under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Patent is directed to credentialing...more

Knobbe Martens

Free Stream Gets Caught in the Section 101 Sandbox

Knobbe Martens on

FREE STREAM MEDIA CORP. v. ALPHONSO INC. Before Judges Dyk, Reyna, and Hughes. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California - Summary: Patent claims were directed to an abstract...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Personalized Media Communications, LLC v. Apple, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2021)

Signal Processing Claims for Decrypting Encrypted Information Found Patent Ineligible - Last week, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division ruled that Defendant Apple, Inc. (hereinafter...more

McDermott Will & Emery

New or Not, Object-Oriented Simulation Patent Ineligible Under § 101

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s pleadings-stage determination that patent claims directed to an object-oriented simulation were subject matter ineligible under 35 USC § 101. Simio,...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Remote Appliance Control Patent Compared to Pony Express, Invalid Under Section 101

Holland & Knight LLP on

Karamelion has asserted its two patents more than 40 times since the summer of 2018, typically settling the cases prior to a responsive pleading. This activity will have to go on hold, at least for the time being, as the U.S....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

Holland & Knight LLP

D. Delaware Awards Attorneys' Fees Due To Weak Section 101 Arguments, Patent Litigation Conduct

Holland & Knight LLP on

CompanyCam moved to dismiss plaintiff's complaint because the asserted '872 patent, titled "Device and Method for Embedding and Retrieving Information in Digital Images," was directed to ineligible subject matter. The U.S....more

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints

District of Delaware Goes against Prior Decisions and Declines to Dismiss Willful Infringement Claims Despite Failure to Allege...

On July 30, 2020, the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware, in APS Technology, Inc. v. Vertex Downhole, Inc. et al, No. 19-cv-01166, denied Vertex Downhole’s Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss APS’s patent...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Affirms Rule 12(b)(6) Dismissal Because the Patent Was Directed to the Patent-Ineligible Abstract Idea of Teaching...

The Federal Circuit recently affirmed a district court’s dismissal because the claims directed to an interactive video game for learning to play guitar were patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In its ruling, the court...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

District Court Granted Rule 12(b)(6) Dismissal Because the Patent Was Directed to the Patent-Ineligible Abstract Idea of Using...

A district court in Mississippi recently granted a Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss computer-implemented claims as patent-ineligible abstract ideas under 35 U.S.C § 101. The patent is directed to using a barcode to facilitate...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Federal Circuit Snubs Extrinsic Evidence in Reversing Ruling on 12(b)(6) Motion Arguing Invalidity Under § 101

In CardioNet, LLC, et al. v. InfoBionic, Inc., the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s ruling that affirmed a defendant’s 12(b)(6) motion that the asserted claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, based on step one...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Uniloc USA, Inc. v. LG Electronics USA, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

Uniloc, owner of U.S. Patent No. 6,993,049, brought an action for infringement of that patent against LG in the Northern District of California.  The District Court granted LG's motion to dismiss on the pleadings, agreeing...more

68 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