Latest Posts › Patents

Share:

Coffelt v. NVIDIA Corp. (C.D. Cal. 2016) - Mathematical Algorithm Found to be Unpatentable

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

BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016) - Federal Circuit Concurrence -- Decide Patentability...

The Federal Circuit earlier today vacated a District Court's order dismissing BASCOM's complaint and remanded for further proceedings. BASCOM sued AT&T Inc. for patent infringement of U.S. Patent No. 5,987,606, and the U.S....more

Femto-Sec Tech, Inc. v. Lensar, Inc. (C.D. Cal. 2016)

Patent Having Claims That Apply Law of Nature Is Patent-Eligible - On June 8, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California issued an order denying a motion to dismiss, and found that U.S. Patent...more

Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC v. Blackberry Corp. (N.D. Tex. 2016)

Electronic Delivery of Messages Equated to U.S. Post Office Services - On May 12, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas issued an Order in a case captioned Mobile Telecommunications Technologies, LLC...more

Pre-AIA and Post-AIA Issues Presented by the On-Sale Bar

The “on-sale” bar to patentability refers to a sale or offer for sale of an invention that can invalidate the patent for that invention. The America-Invents-Act (AIA), which altered the language in the statutes that apply to...more

Corelogic, Inc. v. Boundary Solutions, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

Patent Directed to Geographic Parcel Boundary Maps (for Tax Purposes) Not a Covered Business Method - On May 24, 2016, the U.S. Patent Office Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution of...more

AT&T Mobility LLC v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC (PTAB 2016)

Directory Assistance Call Completion Is Not A Financial Service for CBM Purposes - On May 4, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a decision denying institution of a Covered Business Method (CBM)...more

In re Certain Activity Tracking Devices, Systems, and Components Thereof

Pepys (17th century) recorded his sleep patterns, so wearable devices that record sleep patterns unpatentable? On April 27, 2016, the U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC) issued an Order indicating that two patents...more

USPTO Provides Insight on PTAB Amendment Motions

On Monday, May 9, 2016, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published information on Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) trials regarding motions to amend claims. The Acting Chief Administrative Patent Judge, Nathan...more

Avago Technologies General IP (Singapore) Pte Ltd. v. Asustek Computer, Inc. (N.D. Cal. 2016)

"Quick Look Test" Used by District Court to Support Lack of Preemption and Find Software Claims Patent Eligible - On April 15, 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California issued an Order Denying...more

Motorola Mobility, LLC, v. Intellectual Ventures I, LLC (PTAB 2016)

After Multiple CBM Petitions, Motorola Invalidates Software Patent - On March 21, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in the Covered Business Method (CBM) patent review...more

Square, Inc. v. Protegrity Corp. (PTAB 2016)

U.S. Patent to Database for Protecting Formula for Coca-Cola Found Invalid under CBM Review - On March 2, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in the Covered Business...more

E-Loan, Inc. v. IMX, Inc. (PTAB 2016)

Typical "Business Method Patent" Struck Down by PTAB using CBM Review - On February 16, 2016, the USPTO Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) issued a final written decision in the Covered Business Method (CBM) patent...more

Transweb, LLC v. 3M Innovative Properties Co. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Antitrust Violation Found in Patent Infringement Litigation, and (Trebled) Attorney Fees for Defending Infringement Awarded as Damages - On February 10, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in a case captioned...more

Subject Matter Eligibility in the Information Age

By Joseph Herndon -- The test for what is patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in the United States has become quite difficult to understand.  In Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, the Supreme Court provided a two-step test...more

Lismont v. Alexander Binzel Corp. (Fed. Cir. 2016)

Laches Bars Claim to Change Inventorship on Issued U.S. Patent - On February 16, 2016, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in a case captioned Hedwig Lismont v. Alexander Binzel Corp. This appeal arises from an...more

Gonzalez v. Infostream Group, Inc. (E.D. Tex. 2016)

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

Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Corp. (E.D. Tex. 2016)

Genband US LLC sued Metaswitch for infringement of claims of U.S. Patent No. 6,772,210 ("the '210 Patent") and U.S. Patent No 7,047,561 ("the '561 Patent") in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas...more

Recognicorp, LLC v. Nintendo Co. (W.D. Wash. 2015)

Generic Software Claims Found Ineligible under § 101 - A common theme found in recent patent litigation is that software claims lacking detail are more likely to be found invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The U.S....more

01 Communique Laboratory, Inc. vs. Citrix Systems, Inc., (N.D. Ohio 2015)

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

"Software" Claims Reciting No Structural Components and Having Questionable Novelty Struck Down under 35 U.S.C. § 101

Two recent District Court decisions show examples of "weak" claims, which in the past would likely be found invalid as lacking novelty or being obvious, but today are struck down as being unpatentable under § 101. The cases...more

Ex parte Jung (PTAB 2015) - Computer-Readable Medium Claims vs. Printed Matter

Most software or computer-related patent applications today include a number of different types of claims, such as method claims, device claims, and computer-readable medium (CRM) claims. Such CRM claims are usually directed...more

PTAB Issues Questionable 101 Decision

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has likely seen an increase in the number of appealed rejections under 35 U.S.C. § 101 due to the Supreme Court's decision in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v....more

In re Steed (Fed. Cir. 2015) - Swearing Behind Reference Still Requires Proof of (Timely Filed) Evidence

Thomas Steed, Sourav Bhattacharya, and Sandeep Seshadrijois (collectively "Steed") filed a patent application entitled "Web-Integrated On-Line Financial Database System and Method for Debt Recovery," on April 6, 2004, with...more

110 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 5

"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