News & Analysis as of

Patent-Eligible Subject Matter › Google

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 -
Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C.

“AI-Related” Chip Patents - 1.6 Billion Reasons Why Google May Have Agreed to Settle

Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C. on

Recent headlines have focused on the $1.6 billion damages claim and Google’s possible exposure in Singular Computing’s patent infringement lawsuit involving Google’s “AI-related” chips. $1.6 billion is certainly not chump...more

Troutman Pepper

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

Troutman Pepper on

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

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

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

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

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

AEON Law

Patent Poetry: Federal Circuit Finds Plausible Allegations of Inventive Concept in Google Patent Dispute

AEON Law on

The Federal Circuit has reversed a New York court’s grant of a motion by Google to dismiss a patent infringement case against the company. The court found that the plaintiff had plausibly alleged an inventive concept in its...more

Knobbe Martens

A Preamble That Saves May Be a Preamble That Limits

Knobbe Martens on

DATA ENGINE TECHNOLOGIES LLC v. GOOGLE LLC. Before Reyna, Hughes, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A patentee that relies on language in the preamble to...more

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP

Video Gaming / E-Gaming Law Update - June 2020

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP on

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

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review - March 2019

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Determines Time-Barred Petitioner Joined to an IPR Has Appellate Standing - In Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc. v. Research Corporation Tech., Appeal Nos. 2017-2088, -2089, -2091, the Federal Circuit held that a...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases - February 2019 #2

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC on

PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC, Appeal No. 2017-2508 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 6, 2019) In an appeal from an order of the United States District Court for the District of...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Data Engine Technologies LLC v. Google LLC (Fed. Cir 2018)

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP on

Data Engine Technologies (DET) filed an infringement suit against Google in the District of Delaware contending infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,590,259, 5,784,545, 6,282,551, and 5,303,146. Google responded with a Rule...more

Knobbe Martens

Data Engine Technologies LLC v. Google LLC

Knobbe Martens on

Federal Circuit Summary - Before Judges Reyna, Bryson, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. Summary: A claim that recites a specific method for navigating through...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - July 2016

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP on

Supreme Court: Status Quo in Cuozzo - Why it matters: On June 20, 2016, the Supreme Court decided Cuozzo Speed Technologies v. Lee, where it rejected challenges to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes...more

Morris James LLP

Court Awards Costs To The Prevailing Party In Excess Of The Costs Taxable By The Clerk Under Rule 54.1

Morris James LLP on

Defendant sought costs as the prevailing party in the amount of $83,346.60. The clerk of the court limited the taxable costs to $2,911.31 pursuant to local rule 54.1denying the remainder. The court rejects the argument that...more

McDermott Will & Emery

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

McDermott Will & Emery on

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

Perkins Coie

Inter Partes Review Proceedings: A Third Anniversary Report

Perkins Coie on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

An Abstract Idea by Any Other Name - Epicor Software Corp. v. Protegrity Corp.; Google Inc. v. Unwired Planet, LLC

McDermott Will & Emery on

Addressing the issue of unpatentable subject matter in a post-Alice world, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently invalidated two patents under § 101 in separate covered business...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Tracking #AliceStorm: The Dead Keep Piling Up

Fenwick & West LLP on

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

McDermott Will & Emery

Computer-Implemented Business Transaction Claim Must Describe an “Inventive Concept” to Be Patent Eligible

McDermott Will & Emery on

BuySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc. and Loyalty Conversion Systems Corp. v. American Airlines, Inc. - Addressing subject matter eligibility of claims purporting to apply abstract mental processes directed to business...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | October 2014

Knobbe Martens on

Inequitable Conduct Ruling Upheld - In AMERICAN CALCAR, INC. v. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., Appeal No. 2013-1061, the Federal Circuit affirmed a finding of inequitable conduct. Calcar asserted patents related to...more

Winstead PC

Alice in Wonderland: The Ongoing Impact of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l on Computer-Implemented Inventions

Winstead PC on

On June 19, 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l (Alice)[i]. In Alice, the Court held that several patents that pertained to a computerized platform for eliminating risk...more

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP

Post-Alice Federal Circuit Finds Software-Related Patent Not Patent Eligible; Tips on Business Method Patents in New Landscape

Faegre Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP on

In its first precedential decision regarding a business-related invention since the Supreme Court's 2014 Alice v. CLS Bank decision, the Federal Circuit held claims invalid for lack of patent eligibility under Section 101 of...more

Latham & Watkins LLP

Early Lessons on Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International and Section 101 From Recent Court Decisions

Latham & Watkins LLP on

Alice and its immediate aftermath in the lower courts – In Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014), the US Supreme Court held that claims to “generic computer implementation” of abstract ideas are...more

Tucker Arensberg, P.C.

Trouble for Software & Business Method Patents – Federal Circuit Invalidates Patent Claims Using Alice Framework

Tucker Arensberg, P.C. on

BUYSAFE, INC. V. GOOGLE, INC. To secure a patent in the United States, an invention must meet a number of requirements. In addition to being novel, useful, and non-obvious (35 U.S.C. §102 and §103), an invention must...more

22 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 1

"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:
Sign up Log in
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide