Electronic Gaming Patents Found Invalid under § 101 -
In the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Texas (Houston Division), Plaintiff Epic Tech, LLC (a seller of so-called "sweepstakes games") sued...more
Last month, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Washington granted Defendant Amazon.com's Motion to Dismiss for Invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101 on the grounds that the two patents asserted by Plaintiff...more
On June 21, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California issued an order granting a motion to dismiss pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6) for lack of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Defendants...more
On March 1, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in a number of related appeals between Blue Calypso, LLC and Groupon, Inc. These related appeals arise from five Covered Business Method (CBM) reviews of five patents...more
Producing "digital labels" is Patent Eligible under § 101 -
On February 6, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (Marshall Division) issued a decision in a case captioned Gonzalez v. Infostream...more
Patent Eligibility Requires Consideration of the Claim as a Whole -
The U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (Eastern Division) issued an opinion on December 21, 2015 in the case captioned 01 Communique...more
In Ex parte Mewherter, a recent decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), the Board handed down a precedential decision regarding the language of...more