Another week and another technology patent falls to a patentable subject matter challenge under Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l. In this case, the patentee may have effectively shot itself in the foot with its own statements...more
MyMail is the holder of U.S. Patent Nos. 8,275,863 and 9,021,070, both directed to "methods of modifying toolbars that are displayed on Internet-connected devices such as personal computers." MyMail initially asserted these...more
On June 4, 5, and 11, the Senate Subcommittee on Intellectual Property held hearings on its recent proposal to revise 35 U.S.C. § 101, and in particular the current draft bill to do so. Chairman Tillis and Ranking Member...more
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
Almost two years ago, we covered a dispute in the Southern District of New York (which began in the Eastern District of Texas) involving plaintiff AlphaCap, a non-practicing entity that aggressively asserted its patents...more
One of the more substantive questions in the recent interpretation of what encompasses patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is whether facts should play any role in the analysis. The Supreme Court has not been...more
The second part of the patent-eligibility test of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l involves an inquiry into whether certain elements of a claim directed to an unpatentable judicial exception are "well-understood, routine, and...more
In early February, the Federal Circuit published an opinion in HP Inc. v. Berkheimer stating clearly –- for the first time -- that patent-eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 should be determined as a matter of law, but with...more
Intellectual Ventures (IV) sued Symantec in the District of Delaware, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,537,533. The District Court invalidated the '533 patent on a summary judgment motion as being directed to...more
One of the more frustrating aspects of the current judicial patent eligibility framework is the propensity for courts, even the Federal Circuit, to carry out the two-part test from Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l in a...more
Intellectual Ventures I (IV) brought an action against Erie Indemnity Company in the Western District of Pennsylvania, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent No. 7,757,298. Erie filed a motion to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6),...more
Two-Way Media brought an action against Comcast in the District of Delaware, claiming infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,778,187, 5,983,005, 6,434,622, and 7,266,686. The District Court dismissed the case on the pleadings,...more
Three years ago, the Supreme Court's Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l case set forth a two-part test to determine whether claims are directed to patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. One must first decide...more
When a district court judge states that "[o]ne could say this case is about a patent that claims too much and a legal test that provides too little," it is not hard to guess which way the case is going to go (the patent gets...more
The textbook policy rationale for the existence of a patent system is a quid-pro-quo -- a tradeoff in which an inventor is granted a time-limited property right over his or her invention in return for disclosing it to the...more
Federal Circuit Finds Motion Tracking System to be Patent-Eligible -
After the dark days of 2014 and 2015, in which exactly one Federal Circuit decision out of over twenty 35 U.S.C. § 101 challenges was found to meet the...more
As discussed in a previous article, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office recently published new subject matter eligibility examples directed to the abstract idea exception to patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 101. These...more
About a week before the holidays, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office quietly published a trio of new subject matter eligibility examples directed to the abstract idea exception to patentability. These are the latest in a...more
The Supreme Court's 2014 Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l decision requires the application of a two-part test to determine whether claims are directed to patent-eligible subject matter. One must first determine...more
Plaintiff Verint asserted six patents against Red Box (U.S. Patent Nos. 7,774,854, 5,790,798, 6,510,220, RE43,324, RE43,386, and 8,189,763) in the District Court for the Southern District of New York. Red Box rebutted,...more
Amdocs sued Openet in the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging infringement of U.S. Patent Nos. 7,631,065, 7,412,510, 6,947,984, and 6,836,797. Openet moved for judgment on the pleadings on the grounds that all four...more
On November 2nd, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published an update to its guidance regarding the examination of claims with respect to the patent-eligibility requirements of 35 U.S.C. § 101 (see Memorandum entitled...more
Synopsys brought a patent infringement action against Mentor Graphics in the Northern District of California, alleging infringement of various claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 5,530,841, 5,680,318, 5,748,488, and 6,836,420. Claim...more
Anecdotally, there seems to be a loosening up regarding the application of § 101 by the District Courts. The 2014 Supreme Court decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l has been referred to as sounding a death knell for...more
10/17/2016
/ Bascom Global v AT&T Mobility ,
CLS Bank v Alice Corp ,
Covered Business Method Patents ,
Enfish v Microsoft ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Software ,
USPTO
Iron Gate, holder of U.S. Patent No. 7,203,693, sued Lowe's in the Southern District of New York, alleging infringement. Lowe's moved to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6), contending that the claims of the patent failed to meet...more