35 U.S.C. § 101 Alice Train Rolls on in the District Courts

Here are brief summaries of nine recent cases in which district courts have considered validity of patent claims under 35 U.S.C. 101.  The trend is not good for patent owners. Two Patents Survive a Rule 12 Alice Challenge . . . Mirror Worlds Technologies LLC v. Apple Inc., No. 6:13-CV-419 (E.D. Texas July 7, 2015).  […]

Continue Reading

Claims to Online Purchasing Method Not Patent-Eligible

A court has granted summary judgment of invalidity for failure to claim patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claims to “[a] method of purchasing goods or services over a data network.”  Source Search Technologies, LLC v. Kayak Software Corp., No. 11-3388 (D. N.J. July 1, 2015). The patent owner conceded that the […]

Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Holds Two Intellectual Ventures Patents Invalid for Claiming Unpatentable Subject Matter

The Federal Circuit has held two patents, owned by the well-known non-practicing entity Intellectual Ventures, invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  Intellectual Ventures I LLC et al. v. Capital One NA, No.2014-1506 (July 6, 2015).  One of these patents was directed to a budgeting application, and the other was directed to tailoring web pages to […]

Continue Reading

Website Navigation Claims Patent-Ineligible, Says Federal Circuit

The Federal Circuit has agreed with a district court that claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,707,505 were directed to “retaining information lost in the navigation of online forms,” and that this subject matter constitutes an unpatentable abstract idea.  Internet Patents Corp. v. Active Network, Inc., Nos. 2014-1048, 2014-1061, 2014-1062, 2014-1063 (Fed. Cir. June 23, 2015).  […]

Continue Reading

Federal Circuit Affirms Patent-ineligibility of Online Retailing Pricing Claims

In OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, No. 12-CV-1233 (Fed. Cir. June 11, 2015), the Federal Circuit agreed with a lower court that U.S. Patent No. 7,970,713 failed to claim patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101, but rather “merely [used] a general-purpose computer to implement the abstract idea of ‘price optimization’.” The ‘713 patent […]

Continue Reading

Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, and Lessons for Patent Drafting

Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC, No. 11-CV-2409 (Fed. Cir. June 16, 2015), raises the specter that software patent claims, already oft-challenged in the wake of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, could face the additional challenge of being unexpectedly construed as “means-plus-function” claims under 35 U.S.C. § 112(f). (Or, prior to the America Invents Act, “Section 112, […]

Continue Reading

PTAB Finds Patent Claims Directed to Organizing Digital Images Patent-Ineligible in CBM Review

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) has held all claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,260,587 patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, and the rubric of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank.  Bank of America, NA v. Intellectual Ventures II LLC, Case CBM2014-00033 (PTAB May 18, 2015). The claims of the ’587 patent are directed to […]

Continue Reading

PTAB Invalidates Financial Administration Patent Claims in CBM Review

Patent claims directed to “administration of financial accounts” are not patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, held the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) during a Covered Business Method (“CBM”) post-grant review. The final written decision from the PTAB found all claims of U.S. Patent No. 8,083,137 unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Intellectual Ventures […]

Continue Reading

Functionally-Described Structural Recitations in Method Patent Claims Can Be Indefinite

A patent claim’s recitation of a structural feature was held indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112 because the court found that that the claim term in question – “processing system” – was indefinite functional language. Thus, the court in Cox Communications v. Sprint Communications, No. 12-487-SLR (D. Del. May 15, 2015) granted partial summary judgment […]

Continue Reading

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes