News & Analysis as of

Section 101 Patent Litigation Patents

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

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Federal Circuit Lifts § 101 Barrier on Smart Dumbbells

On August 11, 2025, the Federal Circuit reversed the District of Utah’s ruling that all but one of the claims in PowerBlock Holdings, Inc.’s U.S. Patent No. 7,578,771 were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. PowerBlock Holdings,...more

Fitch, Even, Tabin & Flannery LLP

Federal Circuit Offers Some Helpful Patent Eligibility Guidance

On August 11, in Powerblock Holdings, Inc. v iFit, Inc., the Federal Circuit offered at least two observations that can benefit patentees seeking patent protection for inventions involving software. First, the court noted...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

Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck

Patent Eligibility Uncertainty Persists after Latest Supreme Court Denial

With the Supreme Court sidestepping Audio Evolution Diagnostics, stakeholders should prepare for litigation risk and engage on PERA reform efforts....more

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

PowerBlock Holdings, Inc. v. iFit, Inc.: Electro-Mechanical Systems That Automate Physical Actions Can Be Patent Eligible Under §...

Modern electro-mechanical systems—ranging from humanoid robots and automated assembly lines, to smart workout equipment and medical devices—combine mechanical and electronic components to automate the performance of physical...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

Jones Day

Another Fender-Bender between LKQ and GM

Jones Day on

We have covered the LKQ v. GM design patent disputes from the PTAB decision through appeal and en banc rehearing.  And now we report on yet another chapter in the saga between these parties....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

Irwin IP LLP

Fed. Cir. Ends Approach Employed To Make Challenging Patents As Abstract Ideas More Difficult 

Irwin IP LLP on

Optis Cellular Tech., LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 22-1925 (Fed. Cir. June 16, 2025) - Over a decade ago, the U.S. Supreme Court arguably made it easier to invalidate a patent for claiming nonpatentable abstract ideas when it...more

Jenner & Block

Two Federal Circuit Decisions Nullify Nine-Figure Damages Awards

Jenner & Block on

In two June 2025 decisions, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals rejected patent infringement jury verdicts for $218.5 million and $300 million—one reversed for claiming patent ineligible subject matter, and the other vacated...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Preemption Doctrine: A Necessary Course Correction After Recentive v. Fox

The landscape of patent law for artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) innovations has become fraught with uncertainty. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's precedential opinion in Recentive...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

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

AI, Algorithms and Abstract Ideas: Federal Circuit Reinforces Limits in Recentive v. Fox

In April, the Federal Circuit issued a significant patent law ruling involving artificial intelligence. In Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp, the Court addressed a core question facing many AI-driven businesses: When are...more

McDermott Will & Schulte

In Determining Subject Matter Eligibility, the Name of the Game Is the Claim

In a decision underscoring the distinct standards governing enablement under §§ 102 and 112, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s finding that a prior art reference was...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Mitek Systems Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association

Mitek Systems Inc. v. United Services Automobile Association, Appeal No. 2023-1687 (Fed. Cir. June 12, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit examined the limits of declaratory judgment jurisdiction for a...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Subject Matter Eligibility in the 21st Century: Echoes of pre-§ 103 Obviousness*

The evolution of subject matter eligibility after the Supreme Court's decisions in Prometheus v. Mayo, Alice v. CLS Bank, and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics has resulted in a regime of predictable...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Microprocessor v. Abacus: The Fictional Patent-Eligibility Debate between a Patent Attorney and a Retired Supreme Court Justice

JUSTICE HÄAGEN-DAZS:  Imagine King Tut lounging outside his pyramid, surrounded by gold and bad financial instincts. He's handing out chits left and right, "Good for one unit of gold, redeemable later." He's got an abacus guy...more

Fish & Richardson

Navigating Change at the USPTO

Fish & Richardson on

While it may seem like the only constant at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is change, that sentiment rings especially true in 2025. With a new presidential administration in the White House and numerous...more

Proskauer - The Patent Playbook

Interesting Recent § 101 Cases – Structural Components Are Not Enough

Your Package Could Not Be Delivered – District of Delaware Strikes Electronic Storage Room Claims as Patent Ineligible - Judge Choe-Groves of the United States Court of International Trade granted Defendant’s Motion to...more

Holland & Knight LLP

Section 101 Patent Eligibility Roundup: An Informative PTAB Decision, Squires Speaks

Holland & Knight LLP on

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board designated a recent decision as informative. In the decision, Coke Morgan Stewart, Acting Director of the U.S. Patent and Trade Office (USPTO), ended the petitioner's challenges, noting that...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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

The Narrow Pathway to Patent Eligibility in the Federal Circuit

The last 11 years have taught us much about the Federal Circuit; namely, that a majority of the judges simply do not seem to appreciate software. Given the statements that several have made in opinions, one might be able to...more

Miller Nash LLP

First Machine Learning Patent Ruling: Invalid or Just Obvious?

Miller Nash LLP on

On April 18, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled in Recentive Analytics Inc. v. Fox Corp. et al. that new uses for established machine learning do not make the claims patent-eligible....more

723 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 29

"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