News & Analysis as of

Section 101 Patent Litigation

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Preemption Doctrine: A Necessary Course Correction After Recentive v. Fox

The landscape of patent law for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) innovations has become fraught with uncertainty. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's precedential opinion in Recentive...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Federal Circuit Vacates $300 Million Verdict Against Apple, Orders Third Trial in LTE Patent Dispute

In a pivotal ruling for patent damages and standard-essential patent (SEP) litigation, the Federal Circuit vacated a $300 million award against Apple in a long-standing dispute with Optis Cellular Technology, LLC. See Optis...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Vacates Jury Verdict and Damages for Multiple Errors

On June 16, in Optis Cellular Technology v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit issued a decision reversing the district court on multiple grounds, including § 101 patent eligibility and trial procedure, in vacating infringement...more

Knobbe Martens

Patent Claims Applying Machine Learning Methods to New Environment Do Not Withstand § 101 Scrutiny

Knobbe Martens on

RECENTIVE ANALYTICS, INC. v. FOX CORP. - Before Dyk, Prost, and Goldberg. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Federal Circuit found that claims applying established methods of...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

AI, Algorithms and Abstract Ideas: Federal Circuit Reinforces Limits in Recentive v. Fox

In April, the Federal Circuit issued a significant patent law ruling involving artificial intelligence. In Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp, the Court addressed a core question facing many AI-driven businesses: When are...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Another Bite at the Apple to Avoid $300 Million in Damages

Recently, the Federal Circuit vacated both the infringement and damages judgments against Apple in a patent case that involves standard-essential patents (SEPs) related to Long-Term Evolution (LTE) technology brought in the...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending June 13, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., No. 2023-2267 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) June 9, 2025). Opinion by Lourie, joined by Dyk and Reyna....more

McDermott Will & Emery

In Determining Subject Matter Eligibility, the Name of the Game Is the Claim

McDermott Will & Emery on

In a decision underscoring the distinct standards governing enablement under §§ 102 and 112, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s finding that a prior art reference was...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Mitek Systems Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association

Mitek Systems Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association, Appeal No. 2023-1687 (Fed. Cir. June 12, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit examined the limits of declaratory judgment jurisdiction for a...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Subject Matter Eligibility in the 21st Century: Echoes of pre-§ 103 Obviousness*

The evolution of subject matter eligibility after the Supreme Court's decisions in Prometheus v. Mayo, Alice v. CLS Bank, and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics has resulted in a regime of predictable...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Dancing with Abstract Ideas: Patent Eligibility in 2025

In June 2014, the U.S. Supreme Court handed down Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l, establishing a now-infamous two-step, judicially-imposed test for patent subject-matter eligibility that narrowed the broad statutory eligibility...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Microprocessor v. Abacus: The Fictional Patent-Eligibility Debate between a Patent Attorney and a Retired Supreme Court Justice

JUSTICE HÄAGEN-DAZS:  Imagine King Tut lounging outside his pyramid, surrounded by gold and bad financial instincts. He's handing out chits left and right, "Good for one unit of gold, redeemable later." He's got an abacus guy...more

Fish & Richardson

Navigating Change at the USPTO

Fish & Richardson on

While it may seem like the only constant at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is change, that sentiment rings especially true in 2025. With a new presidential administration in the White House and numerous...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Interesting Recent § 101 Cases – Structural Components Are Not Enough

Your Package Could Not Be Delivered – District of Delaware Strikes Electronic Storage Room Claims as Patent Ineligible - Judge Choe-Groves of the United States Court of International Trade granted Defendant’s Motion to...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Section 101 Patent Eligibility Roundup: An Informative PTAB Decision, Squires Speaks

Holland & Knight LLP on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board designated a recent decision as informative. In the decision, Coke Morgan Stewart, Acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trade Office (USPTO), ended the petitioner's challenges, noting that...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Grounds Aircraft Taxability Patent Under Section 101

Holland & Knight LLP on

Aviation Capital Partners v. SH Advisors, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the ineligibility of claims directed to determining the taxability status of aircraft based on flight data. The panel upheld...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Narrow Pathway to Patent Eligibility in the Federal Circuit

The last 11 years have taught us much about the Federal Circuit; namely, that a majority of the judges simply do not seem to appreciate software. Given the statements that several have made in opinions, one might be able to...more

Miller Nash LLP

First Machine Learning Patent Ruling: Invalid or Just Obvious?

Miller Nash LLP on

On April 18, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled in Recentive Analytics Inc. v. Fox Corp. et al. that new uses for established machine learning do not make the claims patent-eligible....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Designated Informative: PTO Director Declines IPR Institution Following District Court § 101 Invalidation

McDermott Will & Emery on

The US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) designated a recent Director Review decision as informative, signaling its significance for future proceedings. The decision emphasizes that a final district court ruling invalidating a...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Patents That Merely Claim Applying Machine Learning to a New Field of Use Are Not Patent Eligible

WilmerHale on

Stark, J. Sage Products, LLC (“Sage”) challenged a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“Board”) decision finding two of Sage’s patents unpatentable. After the original appellee, Becton, Dickinson and Co., withdrew, the Director of...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

Alice Patent Eligibility Analysis Divergance before USPTO and District Court: Federal Circuit Clarifies Limits on Relying on USPTO...

Foley & Lardner LLP on

In our prior article, we discussed instances in which the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the district courts made different findings with regard to patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. A recent...more

Bracewell LLP

Recentive v. Fox: Machine-Learning Claims Fail to Make the Grade

Bracewell LLP on

The patent eligibility of claims involving the use of machine learning (ML) was recently considered by the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., Case No. 2023-2437 (Fed....more

Jones Day

INFORMATIVE: Acting Director Rescinds Institution Where Claims Held Invalid in District Court Case

Jones Day on

On August 22, 2024, Hulu, LLC (“Hulu”) filed two separate petitions for inter partes review (“IPR”) of U.S. Patent No. 11,463,768 (“the ’768 Patent”), assigned to Piranha Media Distribution, LLC (“Piranha”). The ’768 Patent...more

Fish & Richardson

Federal Circuit Clarifies Limits of Patent Eligibility for Machine Learning Claims

Fish & Richardson on

In a decision with implications for machine learning-related patent filings, the Federal Circuit in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., No. 2023-2437 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 18, 2025), affirmed the District of Delaware’s...more

McDermott Will & Emery

New Administration, Same Patent Reform Bill

A bipartisan group of senators and congressional representatives reintroduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA), which aims to reform the law of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. PERA seeks to address the...more

747 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 30

"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