CAREDX, INC. V. NATERA, INC.
Before Lourie, Bryson, and Hughes -
Summary: Expert testimony that steps of challenged patent claims were unconventional failed to preclude summary judgment of ineligibility where...more
7/19/2022
/ Abstract Ideas ,
Alice/Mayo ,
Claim Construction ,
Evidence ,
Expert Testimony ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Section 101 ,
Summary Judgment
C R BARD INC. v. ANGIODYNAMICS, INC.
Before Reyna, Schall, and Stoll. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Claims that recited printed matter but arguably included an...more
UNILOC 2017 LLC v. HULU, LLC -
Before O’Malley, Wallach, and Taranto. O’Malley dissenting. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Summary: The Board did not exceed its statutory authority in an inter partes...more
AMERICAN AXLE & MANUFACTURING, INC. v. NEAPCO HOLDINGS LLC -
Before Dyk, Moore, Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
Summary: Mechanical method claims involving tuning...more
MYMAIL, LTD. v. OOVOO, LLC -
Before Lourie, O’Malley and Reyna. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California.
Summary: If the parties litigating a § 101 challenge at the pleading...more
The Federal Circuit’s 2018 decision in Berkheimer v. HP Inc. was likely the most consequential development in patent eligibility since the Supreme Court introduced its two-part eligibility framework in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank...more
Federal Circuit Summary -
Before Moore, Reyna, and Wallach. Appeal from the Southern District of California.
Summary: District court improperly held that claims were directed to a natural law where the claims recited a...more
Over the last year, several Federal Circuit judges have filed opinions lamenting the state of the case law that interprets the abstract idea exception to patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. For example, Judge Linn...more
In two recent cases, the Federal Circuit addressed the role of factual questions in resolving patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The first case was Berkheimer v. HP Inc. and the second was Aatrix Software v. Green...more
3/19/2018
/ Appeals ,
Genuine Issue of Material Fact ,
Motion for Reconsideration ,
Motion to Amend ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Popular ,
Reaffirmation ,
Remand ,
Section 101 ,
Summary Judgment ,
Vacated
The increased prominence of Section 101 in computer-related patent disputes stems from the Supreme Court case of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. Before Alice reached the Supreme Court, ten judges of the Federal Circuit considered...more