Category Archives: Software

Google LLC v. At Home Bondholders’ Liquidating Trust

Docket No. 2016-2727, -2729 IPR2015-00657, -00660, -00662, -00666 LOURIE, WALLACH, STOLL February 22, 2018 Non-precedential Brief summary: Board decision that At Home’s claims related to web page banner ads would not have been obvious affirmed. Summary: Google appealed two final … Continue reading

Posted in Inter Parties Review (IPR), IPR, Obviousness, Software | Leave a comment

Aatrix Software, Inc. v. Green Shades Software, Inc.

Docket No. 2017-1452 MOORE, REYNA (C/D), TARANTO February 14, 2018 Brief summary: DC Rule 12(b)(6) dismissal finding the claims patent ineligible under § 101 reversed- and remanded-in-part as the DC did not consider Aaatrix’s arguments that its claim included an … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Move, Inc. et al. v. Real Estate Alliance Ltd., et al. (REAL)

Docket No. 2017-1463 LOURIE, WALLACH, STOLL February 1, 2018 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC decision that the ‘989 claims are not patent eligible under § 101 affirmed (e.g., no technical details or explanation of how to implement the abstract idea of … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Core Wireless Licensing S.A.R.L. v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al.

Docket No. 2016-2684, 2017-1922 MOORE, O’MALLEY, WALLACH (C/D) January 25, 2018 Brief summary: DC finding of eligibility under § 101 and it denial of JMOL for anticipation and infringement (based on alleged incorrect claim construction) affirmed. Summary: LG appealed ED … Continue reading

Posted in Anticipation (35 USC 102), Claim Construction, Infringement, Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Inventor Holdings, LLC v. Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.

Docket Nos. 2016-2442 WALLACH, CHEN, STOLL December 8, 2017 Brief summary: DC grant of attorney’s fees under § 285 for post-Alice decision conduct affirmed (“[i]t was IH’s responsibility to reassess its case in view of new controlling law”). Summary: IH … Continue reading

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

Intellectual Ventures I and II LLC v. Erie Indemnity Company et al.

Docket No. 2017-1147 PROST, REYNA, WALLACH November 3, 2017 Non-precedential Brief summary: DC finding of § 101 ineligibility affirmed because first two claimed steps could be performed by humans while third step third step of “‘recognizing certain data’…without regard to … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment

Smart Systems Innovations, LLC (“SSI”) v. Chicago Transit Authority, et al. (“CTA”)

Docket No. 2016-1233 REYNA, LINN (D), WALLACH October 18, 2017 Brief summary: DC finding that SSI’s claims are ineligible under § 101 affirmed (e.g., not directed to “a new type of bankcard, turnstile, or database”). Summary: SSI appealed DC finding … Continue reading

Posted in Patentability, Software | Leave a comment