[firm] blog logo
Federal Circuit Questions Use Of Common Sense in Obviousness Rejections

Federal Circuit Questions Use Of Common Sense in Obviousness Rejections

Is common sense good enough to make up for deficiencies of a cited reference in an obviousness analysis??á In Arendi S.A.R.L. v. Apple Inc., the Federal Circuit said ?Ç£no,?Ç¥ by reversing a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (?Ç£PTAB?Ç¥) to invalidate U.S. Patent No. 7,917,843 (the ?Ç£Arendi patent?Ç¥). When Arendi S.A.R.L., a Luxembourg company, brought patent infringement suits against several technology heavyweights, including Apple, Inc., Google, Inc., and Motorola Mobility LLC, these defendant companies struck back by filing a petition for an Inter Partes Review (?Ç£IPR?Ç¥) seeking to invalidate the Arendi patent. ?áIn the IPR proceeding, the PTAB invalidated the Arendi patent on the grounds of obviousness under 35 U.S.C. ?º103.?á Arendi then appealed the case to the U.S. Court of Appeal for the Federal Circuit. The Arendi patent is directed to computer functions that allow a user to remain in a document displayed by a first computer… Continue Reading

The Federal Circuit Muddies The 101 Waters After BASCOM

The Federal Circuit Muddies The 101 Waters After BASCOM

On September 30, 2016, in Intellectual Ventures I LLC, v. Symantec Corp., No. 15-1769, 15-1770, 15-1771, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) overturned a lower court?ÇÖs finding of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C.?á?º?á101 for a patent directed to using computer virus screening in a telephone network, while affirming the lower court?ÇÖs finding of patent ineligibility under 35 U.S.C.?á?º?á101 for two other patents directed to methods of screening emails and other data files for unwanted content, and methods of routing e-mail messages based on specified rules.?á ?á?áThe court analyzed each of the patents at issue separately using the Mayo/Alice two-part test for determining patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C.?á?º?á101, coming to the same conclusion each time. First, the court addressed U.S. Patent No.?á 6,460,050 (?Ç£the ?Çÿ050 patent?Ç¥), which was held patent ineligible by the lower court. ?áThe ?Çÿ050 patent is directed to filtering e-mails that have unwanted content by… Continue Reading

The Few, The Proud, The Patent-Eligible Software Claims

The Few, The Proud, The Patent-Eligible Software Claims

It is no secret that it is difficult for software technology patent claims to be deemed subject matter eligible under 35 U.S.C. ?º 101 on appeal, as only a handful of cases involving software technology have passed ?º 101 scrutiny by the Federal Circuit since the Supreme Court?ÇÖs decision in Alice v. CLS Bank[1]: Until recently, there have been only three such cases: DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P.,[2] Enfish LLC v. Microsoft Corp.,[3] and BASCOM Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC.[4] However, now a fourth case may be added to those ranks. On September 13, 2016, the Federal Circuit decided McRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America Inc.,[5] ruling that claims directed to automating part of a preexisting 3-D animation method were patent-eligible under ?º 101. Below is a review of the McRO case facts, the legal reasoning of the Federal Circuit in reaching its conclusion, and… Continue Reading

November 2016
S M T W T F S
 12345
6789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
27282930  

Archives