News & Analysis as of

CAFC Patents Section 101

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Upholds Invalidation Of Photo-Tagging Patents Under 35 U.S.C. § 101 And Alice/Mayo

A&O Shearman on

On September 17, 2024, Judges Taranto, Chen and Cunningham of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) upheld the invalidation of a patent belonging to Angel Technologies Group, LLC and dismissed...more

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Reverses § 101 Summary Judgment Of Invalidity, Holding That Describing Claims At High Level Of Abstraction And...

A&O Shearman on

On September 9, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) reversed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s decision finding asserted claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. §...more

WilmerHale

CAFC Patent Cases - January 2021

WilmerHale on

Precedential Federal Circuit Opinions - SIMIO, LLC v. FLEXSIM SOFTWARE PRODUCTS [OPINION] (2020-1171, 12/29/20) (Prost, Clevenger, Stoll) - Prost, J. Affirming dismissal because claims were ineligible under § 101....more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

For the First Time, a Medical Treatment Patent Is Ruled Invalid Under Mayo/Myriad

As discussed in a previous blog post, since Mayo v. Prometheus, critics of medical treatment patents have advocated that such patents should be banned from patenting. While such arguments seemed futile based on the consistent...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Detecting Disease Is Not a “Tangible and Useful Result” Eligible for Patenting

The federal appeals court with jurisdiction over questions of patent law has consistently held that methods of diagnosing a disease or other biological condition violate the Supreme Court’s ban on patenting “natural...more

BakerHostetler

CAFC: Patents Enjoy a Presumption of Subject Matter Eligibility

BakerHostetler on

Co-authored by: Phillip Wolfe In Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) rendered an important decision declaring that the presumption of validity under § 282 includes the...more

Sunstein LLP

Section 101 Gains a Toehold in IPRs

Sunstein LLP on

Inter partes reviews (IPR) are limited by statute to grounds of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §§ 102 (novelty requirement) and 103 (nonobviousness requirement) and on the basis of prior art patents or printed publications....more

BakerHostetler

CAFC Hands Down Significant § 101 Decision in Bascom Global Internet

BakerHostetler on

In Bascom Global Internet v. AT&T Mobility LLC, Bascom Global sued for infringement of US Patent No. 5,987,606, titled “Method And System For Content Filtering Information Retrieved From An Internet Computer Network,”...more

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

CAFC Finds Software Patent Eligible Under 35 U.S.C. §101

The Federal Circuit in Enfish LLC v. Microsoft reverses the California District Court decision that several patents related to a “self-referential” database were invalid as ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101. Overview - ...more

9 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:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide