News & Analysis as of

Patent Ownership Section 101

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

IP Hot Topic: Update on USPTO Guidance for AI Subject Matter Eligibility

On July 16, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released updated guidance on patent subject matter eligibility, focusing on artificial intelligence (AI). This update, effective from July 17, 2024, is...more

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

Navigating Inventorship of AI-Assisted Inventions: USPTO's Guidance and Implications

This article discusses the February 13, 2024 guidance issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) regarding the inventorship of artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted inventions. While this guidance marks a...more

Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld LLP

Senior Circuit Judge Issues Split Decision on Patent Eligibility of Claims Directed to Restricting Access to Computer Files

Senior Circuit Judge Bryson of the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation in the District of Delaware, recently granted-in-part and denied-in-part a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment based on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Sanderling Management v. Snap Inc. No. 21-2173 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 12, 2023) Alice – 35 U.S.C. § 101

This case addresses patent eligibility under Alice and whether the district court should have afforded the patent owner leave to amend its complaint. Background - Sanderling asserted three patents sharing a common...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Invalidates Patent Directed to Customer Loyalty and Rewards System

Holland & Knight LLP on

In cxLoyalty Inc. v. Maritz Holdings Inc., 986 F.3d 1367, 1380 (Fed. Cir. 2021), Patent No. 7,134,087 explained that loyalty programs often issue points to customers as a reward for certain activities and allow the customers...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Confirms Data Privacy Patent Is an Invalid Abstract Idea under Section 101

Holland & Knight LLP on

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit looked at a patent directed to a data privacy system that described users operating mobile device apps to "socialize, bank, shop, and navigate." As users operate such apps,...more

Holland & Knight LLP

U.S. Supreme Court Declines to Hear Another Section 101 Case

Holland & Knight LLP on

Those waiting for the U.S. Supreme Court to weigh in on Section 101 were, once again, disappointed this week. On Nov. 16, 2020, in the case of WhitServe LLC v. Donuts Inc. et al., case no. 20-325 (U.S. Supreme Court), the...more

Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLP

Section 101 Kills Substitute Claims in Inter Partes Review

The Federal Circuit recently held that substitute claims proposed by a patent owner in an IPR are not limited to patentability challenges under 35 U.S.C. §§102 and 103, and can be challenged under 35 U.S.C. §101. ...more

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

2019 Report: Federal Circuit Appeals from the PTAB - Summaries of Key 2018 Decisions

In 2018, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit docketed close to 600 appeals from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). That is the second highest number since starting to hear post-American Invents Act...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Fresh From the Bench: Latest Federal Circuit Court Cases

Berkheimer v. HP Inc., Appeal No. 2017-1437 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 8, 2018) - In Berkheimer v. HP Inc., the Federal Circuit reviewed the District Court’s summary judgment finding that certain claims of a patent were invalid as...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

PTAB Enters Sua Sponte Patent Eligibility Rejections

Foley & Lardner LLP on

We’ve written previously about ex parte decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) affirming patent eligibility rejections that seem to be inconsistent with the USPTO’s Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance....more

McDermott Will & Emery

Mixed Results: Federal Circuit’s Intervening § 101 Determination Faces PTAB Dissent

After the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit addressed the very same issue and patent, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) reached a split decision, finding the claims to be patent eligible under § 101 despite...more

Knobbe Martens

PTAB Finds Claims Directed to an MRI Machine Patent-Ineligible

Knobbe Martens on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) recently held in Ex parte Itagaki and Nishiara (PTAB 2016) that claims reciting a magnetic resonance imaging apparatus are directed to ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §...more

Knobbe Martens

Federal Circuit Review | October 2016

Knobbe Martens on

Withdrawal of Claims During Prosecution Can Trigger Prosecution History Estoppel In UCB, Inc. v. Yeda Research and Development Co., Ltd., Appeal No. 2015-1957, the Federal Circuit held that prosecution estoppel can apply even...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Patent owner Electric Power Group asserted U.S. Patent Nos. 7,233,843, 8,060,259, and 8,401,710 against Alstom S.A. and various other parties in the Central District of California. The District Court granted Alstom's motion...more

Manatt, Phelps & Phillips, LLP

Intellectual Property Law - June 2016

Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016: An Overview - Why it matters: The Defend Trade Secrets Act of 2016 (DTSA) was signed into law on May 11, 2016 and gives trade secret owners a federal cause of action for injunctive...more

16 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