There have been several patent-eligibility rulings by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit this year, but on August 16, 2019, the Fed Circuit held that claim construction in-dispute must be resolved before patent-eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101 can be analyzed, in MyMail, Ltd. v. ooVoo, LLC.[1] The somewhat circuitous procedural aspects of this …
Category: 101
35 U.S. Code § 101 – Inventions patentable. Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.
Fed Circuit Watch: Valuable Contribution Is Not Necessarily Patent-Eligible
In a strange ruling by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, on July 29, 2019, although publicly released on August 9, 2019, in Genetic Veterinary Scis., Inc. v. Laboklin GmbH & Co KG,[1] the Fed Circuit found that in spite of the claimed invention’s “valuable contribution” to the veterinary sciences, it remained outside …
Fed Circuit Watch: Issued Patents are Presumptively Valid and Patent-Eligible
On June 25, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit handed down CellSpin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc.,[1] in what is an important case dealing with patent-eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101, further hardening by the Fed Circuit that factual allegations in the pleadings can support patent-eligibility. Further, Cellspin held that issued patents are …
Fed Circuit Watch: EV Battery Claims Found Patent-Ineligible
What had opened with a promise of clarity for patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101 took a detour with the ChargePoint, Inc. v. SemaConnect, Inc.,[1] decision issued on March 28 2019, by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. Four patents were at-issue, all owned by ChargePoint: U.S. Patent Nos. 8,138,715 (‘715), …
Fed Circuit Watch: Treatment Method Claims Found Patent-Eligible
The third treatment method case in the last year that was challenged as patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101 has been found eligible by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, in a recent case, Endo Pharms. Inc. v. Teva Pharms. USA, Inc.,[1] decided March 28, 2019. Endo owns U.S. Patent No. 8,808,737 …
CannabIP: District Court Finds §101 Patent-Eligibility in First Cannabis Patent Litigation
On April 17, 2019, Judge William J. Martinez denied an early motion for partial summary judgment for invalidity based patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. §101, in the first federal patent infringement case testing the patent claims of cannabinoid formulations. Judge Martinez, sitting in the District of Colorado, found the patent-at-issue, U.S. Patent No. 9,730,911 …
Fed Circuit Watch: Network Intrusion Claims Found Patent-Eligible
On March 20, 2019, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ruled in SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Sys., Inc.,[1] in which claims directed to network intrusion were found patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. §101. While the ruling is a welcome sign of patent-eligibility, the ruling itself is convoluted in its rationale and difficult to …
Fed Circuit Watch: Dietary Supplement Claims Found Patent-Eligible
In its second patent-eligibility ruling in a few weeks, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit decided Natural Alts. Int’l, Inc. v. Creative Compounds, LLC,[1] on March 15, 2019, in which it found claims directed to dietary supplements in six patents to be patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. §101. Natural Alternatives International (NAI) was recently …
Fed Circuit Watch: Party Lacks Both Sovereign Immunity and Patent-Eligible Treatment Claims
In one of the more fascinating legal analyses presented in recent memory, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit handed down Univ. of Florida Res. Foundation, Inc. v. General Electric Co.,[1] on February 26, 2019. The issues presented were state assertion of sovereign immunity in federal court, and method and system of treatment claims …
Fed Circuit Watch: Another Mayo, Another §101 Kill
Medical diagnostics patents involving a certain lab testing company named Mayo took a hit when those patents were deemed invalid under 35 U.S.C. §101. No, it’s not that Mayo case,[1] but the one in which the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently decided on February 6, 2019, Athena Diagnostics, Inc. v. Mayo Collaborative …