News & Analysis as of September 25, 2024

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter › Apple

+ Follow

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a... more +

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter refers to the types of inventions that can be legally patented. The criteria for patentability varies depending on the jurisdiction. In the United States, for instance, if a researcher discovers a naturally occurring substance, the substance itself cannot be patented. This issue was examined in a United States Supreme Court case, AMP v. Myriad, in regard to the patentability of human genes. less -

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: An Expert Need Not Have Acquired the Requisite Skill Level Prior to the Time of the Invention

WilmerHale on 9/12/2024

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more

EDVA Judge Rules That Geolocation Patents Are Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

Troutman Pepper on 9/25/2023

On September 18, in identical opinions issued in separate cases against Google and Apple, EDVA District Judge Michael Nachmanoff ruled that four patents directed toward geolocation of mobile devices claimed patent-ineligible...more

Error In Declaration Insufficient To Sink IPR

Jones Day on 9/25/2023

In a precedential opinion, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated a final written decision in which the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) found that Apple had failed to meet its burden of showing...more

Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB and ITC: Summaries of Key 2022 Decisions

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C. on 2/8/2023

As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more

Count On It, Plural Term Means More Than One

McDermott Will & Emery on 3/17/2022

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed Patent Trial & Appeal Board (Board) patentability decisions after determining that the Board did not err in construing multiple terms within the challenged patents....more

Lack of Specificity in the Specification Creates Patent Eligibility Issues

Knobbe Martens on 8/27/2021

UNIVERSAL SECURE REGISTRY LLC v. APPLE INC. Before Taranto, Wallach, and Stoll. Appeal from U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee’s reference to existing known methods and techniques in...more

Yu v. Apple (Fed. Cir. 2021)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 6/14/2021

When the Supreme Court began poking around into the law of patent eligibility just over a decade ago, the invention topics that it considered under the abstract idea exception were limited to types of financial transactions. ...more

Video Gaming / E-Gaming Law Update - June 2020

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on 7/13/2020

Does My Video Game Violate Consumers’ Privacy Rights? The California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) is the first broad-based state statute aimed at enhancing personal privacy rights for consumers. Following the example set by...more

PTAB Reconciles Its Prior §101 Ruling With CBM Institution

Jones Day on 12/3/2019

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

Yu v. Apple Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2019)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 7/23/2019

Patent Claims for Digital Camera Are Not Patent Eligible - In two related actions in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California brought by Yanbin Yu and Zhongxuan Zhang (patentee), Apple Inc. and...more

Federal Circuit Review - April 2019

Knobbe Martens on 5/10/2019

Just Because Something May Result From a Prior Art Teaching Does Not Make it Inherent in that Teaching - In Personal Web Technologies, LLC v. Apple, Inc., Appeal No. 2018-1599, the Federal Circuit clarified that the mere...more

Federal Circuit Knocks Out Patents After CBM Challenge

Foley & Lardner LLP on 2/23/2017

Apple successfully invalidated three patents for failure to recite patent eligible subject matter. Apple, Inc. v. Ameranth, Inc., 2015-1792, 2015-1793 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The patents relate to synchronous communication systems...more

Apple, Inc. v. Ameranth, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 12/2/2016

Computerized Restaurant Ordering Menu Patents Found to Be Directed to Unpatentable Subject Matter - The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reviewed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision in three...more

IP Newsflash - February 2016 #2

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 2/8/2016

SUPREME COURT CASES - Post-Complaint Events or Transactions Cannot Cure Prudential Standing Defects - The U.S. Supreme Court denied Alps South’s writ to review the Federal Circuit’s decision that the company lacked...more

Federal Circuit Review | January 2016

Knobbe Martens on 2/1/2016

The Federal Circuit Will Review Appeals from Inter Partes Review Proceedings Under the “Substantial Evidence” Standard - In Merck & Cie v. Gnosis S.p.A., Appeal No. 2014-1779, the Federal Circuit affirmed a PTAB IPR...more

A Solution to Business Problems May Not Be a Technological Invention - Apple Inc. v. Smartflash LLC

McDermott Will & Emery on 1/4/2016

Addressing the standard for instituting a covered business method (CBM) review, as well as patent eligibility issues under 35 U.S.C. § 101, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) found patents related to payment...more

Inter Partes Review Proceedings: A Third Anniversary Report

Perkins Coie on 9/18/2015

When inter partes review (IPR) proceedings became effective in September 2012, few people would have predicted the transformative effect it would have on patents and the litigation landscape. Three years in, IPR has become...more

Covered Business Patents Jurisdiction Continues to Develop - Apple Inc. v. Smartflash LLC

McDermott Will & Emery on 8/6/2015

In three parallel decisions, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB or Board) determined that patents directed to validating payment and then granting access to data were eligible for covered business method (CBM) review and...more

Tracking #AliceStorm: The Dead Keep Piling Up

Fenwick & West LLP on 4/13/2015

For the first week of April, AliceStorm continues unabated, and though the indices are down, the damage spreads. Not surprisingly, the Eastern District of Texas appears to have become the eye of the storm--that place of calm...more

IP Newsflash - August 2014 #5

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 9/2/2014

Apple’s Motion for Permanent Injunction Denied - After the court found that Samsung infringed one of Apple’s patents on summary judgment and a jury found that Samsung infringed two others, Apple filed a motion for a...more

Intellectual Property LEGAL NEWS - March 22, 2013 • Volume 1, Number 2

Dickinson Wright on 3/25/2013

In This Issue: - AMERICA INVENTS ACT FINAL IMPLEMENTATION: FROM FIRST-TO-INVENT TO FIRST-TO-FILE: The America Invents Act (“AIA”), which went into effect September 16, 2011, introduces some of the most...more

21 Results

/

View per page

Page: of 1