News & Analysis as of

Section 101 Alice/Mayo Patent Infringement

A&O Shearman

Federal Circuit Finds Claims of Selectorized Dumbbell Weight Patent Not Directed to an Abstract Idea

A&O Shearman on

On August 11, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) issued an opinion reversing the decision of the U.S. District Court for the District of Utah that found certain claims of a selectorized dumbbell...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending August 15, 2025

Alston & Bird on

PowerBlock Holdings, Inc. v. iFit, Inc., No. 2024-1177 (Fed. Cir. (D. Utah) Aug. 11, 2025). Opinion by Stoll, joined by Taranto and Scarsi (sitting by designation). PowerBlock sued iFit for infringement of a patent directed...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Feel the burn: Mechanical improvement is patent eligible under § 101

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court’s partial dismissal of the plaintiff’s patent claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101, finding that the claims were not directed to an abstract idea under Alice...more

Knobbe Martens

Can § 101 Carry the Weight?

Knobbe Martens on

POWERBLOCK HOLDING, INC. v. IFIT, INC. - Before Taranto, Stoll, and District Judge Scarsi. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Utah. Under step one of the Alice test, claims should be considered...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

A Weighty Decision by the Federal Circuit Reverses Patent Ineligibility Ruling

In a significant decision for patent law and the fitness equipment industry, a panel of the Federal Circuit reversed a partial dismissal of PowerBlock Holdings, Inc.’s patent infringement claims brought against iFit, Inc. in...more

Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP

Nothing to See Here: Judge Engelmayer Finds Claims Directed to Interactive Mobile Advertising to be Abstract

On July 21, 2025, District Judge Paul A. Engelmayer (S.D.N.Y.) granted Defendants Teads, Inc., Teads SA, and Teads SARL’s (together, “Teads”) Motion to Dismiss Yieldmo, Inc.’s (“Yieldmo”) Amended Complaint alleging that Teads...more

Knobbe Martens

Patent Claims Applying Machine Learning Methods to New Environment Do Not Withstand § 101 Scrutiny

Knobbe Martens on

RECENTIVE ANALYTICS, INC. v. FOX CORP. - Before Dyk, Prost, and Goldberg. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware. The Federal Circuit found that claims applying established methods of...more

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

Another Bite at the Apple to Avoid $300 Million in Damages

Recently, the Federal Circuit vacated both the infringement and damages judgments against Apple in a patent case that involves standard-essential patents (SEPs) related to Long-Term Evolution (LTE) technology brought in the...more

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending June 13, 2025

Alston & Bird on

Fraunhofer-Gesellschaft zur Förderung der angewandten Forschung e.V. v. Sirius XM Radio Inc., No. 2023-2267 (Fed. Cir. (D. Del.) June 9, 2025). Opinion by Lourie, joined by Dyk and Reyna....more

Holland & Knight LLP

Federal Circuit Grounds Aircraft Taxability Patent Under Section 101

Holland & Knight LLP on

Aviation Capital Partners v. SH Advisors, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the ineligibility of claims directed to determining the taxability status of aircraft based on flight data. The panel upheld...more

Hudnell Law Group

Federal Circuit Issues First Word on AI Patent Eligibility

Hudnell Law Group on

On April 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a patent infringement suit brought by Recentive Analytics, Inc. against Fox Corporation. See Recentive Analytics, Inc. v....more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

IP Alerts: Federal Circuit Addresses Subject Matter Eligibility of Claims Involving Generic Machine Learning

On April 18, in Recentive Analytics, Inc., v. Fox Corp., which presented a question of first impression, the Federal Circuit held that claims that do no more than apply established methods of machine learning to a new data...more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Round-Up: February 2025

Fish & Richardson on

This post summarizes some of the significant developments from the Texas District Courts for the month of February 2025....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Patent Eligibility: The Call for Supreme Court Clarity and for an End to Summary Affirmances

The U.S. Supreme Court has once again been urged to revisit 35 U.S.C. § 101, the statute governing patent eligibility. Audio Evolution Diagnostics, Inc. (AED) filed a petition for writ of certiorari, challenging the Federal...more

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

Federal Circuit Patent Ruling Clarifies Section 101 Procedures

WilmerHale on

Courts have long interpreted Title 35 of the U.S. Code, Section 101, to bar patenting abstract ideas, laws of nature or natural phenomena. But until six years ago, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's...more

Fish & Richardson

Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up: July 2024

Fish & Richardson on

Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

Not Just a Blip: Section 101 as Affirmative Defense

On appeal from a motion to dismiss based on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a district court appropriately analyzed certain claims as representative claims and that the...more

Irwin IP LLP

Automating Without Innovating: Patents Held Invalid

Irwin IP LLP on

People.ai, Inc. v. Clari Inc., 2022-1364, (Fed. Cir. April. 7, 2023) - In an appeal before the Federal Circuit, plaintiff People.ai argued to no avail that the Northern District of California erred in its finding of...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

The Name of the Game Is the Claims, Even if Specification Is Shared

McDermott Will & Schulte on

Once again addressing the application of Alice, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit partially reversed a district court’s dismissal of several patents as subject matter ineligible for error in analyzing their...more

Knobbe Martens

Expert Testimony That Contradicts Patent Specification Fails to Create a Genuine Issue of Fact in a Patent Eligibility Dispute

Knobbe Martens on

CAREDX, INC. V. NATERA, INC. Before Lourie, Bryson, and Hughes - Summary: Expert testimony that steps of challenged patent claims were unconventional failed to preclude summary judgment of ineligibility where...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

From Marshall to San Francisco: Transfer Pays Off for Patent Challengers

Eolas Technology filed patent infringement actions against Amazon, Google, and Walmart in the Eastern District of Texas in 2015. The asserted patent generally relates to remote computer systems that allow users at a client...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

New or Not, Object-Oriented Simulation Patent Ineligible Under § 101

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s pleadings-stage determination that patent claims directed to an object-oriented simulation were subject matter ineligible under 35 USC § 101. Simio,...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

“Method of Preparation” Claims Still Patent Eligible Under § 101 in Modified Opinion

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied an accused infringer’s petition for rehearing en banc and issued a modified opinion with additional analysis maintaining its prior finding that patent claims directed to...more

29 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"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