News & Analysis as of September 19, 2024

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter › Federal Rule 12(b)(6)

+ 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 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 -

Hantz Software LLC v. Sage Intacct, Inc.

Haug Partners LLP on 4/3/2023

In Hantz Software, LLC, v. Sage Intacct, Inc.1, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the decision of the District Court for the Northern District of California to invalidate patents that are ineligible under...more

Web IP Ruling Illustrates Ways To Clear Hurdles To Eligibility

Foley & Lardner LLP on 11/8/2022

Since the U.S. Supreme Court's 2014 Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International ruling, patentees attempting to enforce their patents in the software arts have encountered a more significant hurdle for patent eligibility that has...more

Plausible Factual Allegations Concerning Inventive Concepts Preclude Motion to Dismiss

Knobbe Martens on 10/3/2022

COOPERATIVE ENTERTAINMENT, INC. v. KOLLECTIVE TECHNOLOGY, INC. - Before Moore, Lourie, and Stark. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California. - Summary: Plausible allegations...more

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 4/11/2022

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

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

Snell & Wilmer on 3/25/2022

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

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 3/24/2022

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

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 5/24/2021

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

Adaptive Streaming Inc. v. Netflix, Inc. (Fed. Cir. 2020)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 12/23/2020

Adaptive Streaming, the owner of U.S. Patent No. 7,047,305, sued Netflix in the Central District of California for alleged infringement. Netflix moved to dismiss the case on the pleadings under Rule 12(b)(6), asserting that...more

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 11/12/2020

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

A Guide To West Texas Patent Cases Before Albright: Part 2

WilmerHale on 9/14/2020

Our earlier Law360 guest article highlighted the rapid rise in prominence of the Waco Division of the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas since U.S. District Judge Alan Albright was appointed to that court...more

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

Mintz - Intellectual Property Viewpoints on 8/18/2020

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

Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC (Fed. Cir. 2020)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on 7/27/2020

Last week, in Uniloc 2017 LLC v. Hulu, LLC, the Federal Circuit ruled that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may consider patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for substitute claims. The appeal raises issues of finality...more

Impact of Federal Circuit’s Opinion in 'Athena' on Medical Diagnosis Patents

Flaster Greenberg PC on 7/15/2020

Is a new method of diagnosing a disease patentable? Can it survive a motion to dismiss? And, irrespective of the current precedent, should a new method of diagnosing a disease be patentable? These are questions the U.S. Court...more

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 6/18/2020

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

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 6/15/2020

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

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

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP on 5/14/2020

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

Case Law Beats PTO Guidance on Patent Eligibility

McDermott Will & Emery on 5/30/2019

A panel of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found claims directed to methods of identifying and detecting a biomarker to be directed to patent-ineligible natural law, affirming a district court decision while...more

Is Invention “Directed to” an Abstract Idea? Look to the Specification

McDermott Will & Emery on 4/25/2019

Addressing the various factors a court may consider in order to determine whether a claim is “directed to” an abstract idea, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of all claims...more

Latest Federal Court Cases - March 2019

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on 3/6/2019

University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. v. General Electric Company, Appeal No. 2018-1284 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 26, 2019) - The Court this week affirmed the Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal of an infringement lawsuit, finding...more

Specific Functions Improving Computer Technology Are 101-Eligible, Unconventionality Not Required

McDermott Will & Emery on 12/21/2018

In two recent decisions, judges of the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit expounded on the standards under which software-related patent claims are subject matter eligible under 35 USC § 101. Ancora Techs. v. HTC...more

Nike's Shoe Patents Outrun Puma's Challenge

Knobbe Martens on 12/6/2018

On May 3, 2018, Nike filed a lawsuit against Puma in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts accusing Puma of infringing seven of its utility patents related to footwear. In an earlier post on this blog, we...more

Invalidating Patents Under §101 in the Early Stages of Litigation Still Possible Post-Berkheimer and Aatrix

Knobbe Martens on 12/6/2018

Patent eligibility challenges under 35 U.S.C. §101 have been effective tools for defendants to obtain early dismissal of a case without extensive fact finding since the Supreme Court ruling in Alice. Whether a claim recites...more

Claims for Analyzing Twitter Posts Held Unpatentable by Judge Castel

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP on 11/12/2018

On October 29, 2018, United States District Judge P. Kevin Castel (S.D.N.Y.) issued a decision granting Defendant Bloomberg's Rule 12(b)(6) motion to dismiss iSentium's patent infringement claim because it is directed to...more

Chief Judge Stark Denies Defendant’s Partial Motion To Dismiss Based On Patent Ineligible Subject Matter Without Prejudice To...

Fox Rothschild LLP on 10/8/2018

By Memorandum Opinion entered by The Honorable Leonard P. Stark in Visual Effect Innovations, LLC v. Sony Electronics Inc., Civil Action No. 17-1276-LPS (D.Del. September 30, 2018), the Court denied Sony’s partial motion to...more

23andME, INC. v. Ancestry.com DNA, LLC

K&L Gates LLP on 9/21/2018

In 2003, for the first time in history, mankind sequenced an entire human genome. The endeavor – known as The Human Genome Project – took 13 years to complete....more

44 Results

View per page

Page: of 2

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter › Federal Rule 12(b)(6)

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"