Category Archives: Patentability

University of Florida Res. Found., Inc. (UFRF) v. General Electric Co. et al.

Docket No. 2018-1284 PROST, MOORE, WALLACH February 26, 2019 Brief summary: UFRF found to have “waived sovereign immunity as to GE’s § 101 eligibility challenge”. DC grant of GE’s motion to dismiss based on its § 101 defense to infringement … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Athena Diagnostics, Inc. et al. v. Mayo Collaborative Services, LLC

Docket No. 2017-2508 NEWMAN (D), LOURIE, STOLL February 6, 2019 Brief summary: DC finding that method claims relating to a correlation between antibodies to a protein (“MuSK”) and neurological disorders are invalid under § 101 affirmed. Summary: Athena (as exclusive … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability | Leave a comment

In Re: Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V.

Docket No. 2017-2465 CHEN, MAYER, BRYSON December 28, 2018 Brief summary: Board decision affirming the rejection of certain claims relating to a method of playing a dice game under § 101 affirmed (“printed matter” (“the only arguably unconventional aspect”) “fall[s] … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Glasswall Solutions Ltd. et al. v. Clearswift Ltd.

Docket No. 2018-1407 LOURIE, LINN, TARANTO December 20, 2018 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC dismissal of suit for failure to state a claim (FRCP 12(b)(6)) after the asserted claims are invalid as patent ineligible abstract ideas under § 101 affirmed (e.g., … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Gust, Inc. v. AlphaCap Ventures, LLC et al. (Gutride Safier LLP)

Docket No. 2017-2414 WALLACH, LINN, HUGHES September 28, 2018 Brief summary: DC award of fees under § 1927 (“baseless complaint”) against Gutride reversed. Summary: Gutride (a law firm representing AlphaCap) appealed the DC’s “award of fees under 28 USC § … Continue reading

Posted in Attorney's Fees, Patentability | Leave a comment

Ancora Technologies, Inc. v. HTC America, Inc. et al.

Docket Nos. 2018-1404 DYK, WALLACH, TARANTO Nov. 16, 2018 Brief summary: DC grant of HTC’s motion to dismiss under § 101 reversed and remanded since “‘[t]he claimed method…specifically identifies how [a] functionality improvement is effectuated in an assertedly unexpected way” … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Data Engine Technologies LLC (“DET”) v. Google LLC

Docket No. 2017-1135 REYNA, BRYSON, STOLL October 9, 2018 Brief summary: DC finding certain of DET’s claim ineligible under § 101 affirmed-in-part, reversed-in-part (e.g., claims “not abstract, but rather directed to a specific improved method for navigating through complex three-dimensional … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment