RAPID LITIGATION MANAGEMENT v. CELLZDIRECT, INC. (Fed. Cir. 2016) (P) – A claim is not merely “directed to” a law of nature if the end result of the process is new and useful

by | Jul 5, 2016 | [sub] Alice step one, Subject Matter Eligibility

A claim is not merely “directed to” a law of nature under Alice step one if the end result of the process is new and useful. Here, for example, claims reciting a new and useful laboratory technique for preserving hepatocyte liver cells were found to be patent-eligible...

IN RE LF CENTENNIAL LIMITED (Fed. Cir. 2016) (NP) – A common but generic characteristic shared between elements does not support a conclusion of equivalence

by | Jun 29, 2016 | [sub] broadest reasonable interpretation, Claim Interpretation

A common but generic characteristic shared by a claim element and a prior art element does not support even a broadest reasonable interpretation that one can be the other. Here, for example, a “spine” and a “side panel” of a TV console were found to be distinct even...

BASCOM GLOBAL INTERNET v. AT&T MOBILITY LLC (Fed. Cir. 2016) (P) – An “inventive concept” can be found in a non-conventional arrangement of known, conventional pieces

by | Jun 27, 2016 | [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility

An “inventive concept” establishing subject matter eligibility can be found in a non-conventional and non-generic arrangement of otherwise known, conventional pieces. Here, for example, an inventive concept was found in the installation of an Internet-content...

IMMERSION CORPORATION v. HTC CORPORATION (Fed. Cir. 2016) (P) – Filing a continuation application on the same day as its parent application issues does not defeat priority

by | Jun 21, 2016 | [sub] priority, Formal Requirements

Filing a continuation application on the same day as its parent application issues is sufficient to satisfy the “before the patenting” requirement for claiming priority under 35 U.S.C. § 120. Here, for example, the fact that the patent being asserted was filed on the...

CUOZZO SPEED TECHNOLOGIES, LLC V. LEE (S. Ct. 2016) (P) – The decision to institute IPR is non-appealable and the broadest reasonable interpretation is acceptable

by | Jun 20, 2016 | [sub] inter partes review, PTO Procedure

The PTO’s decision to institute an inter partes review is generally non-appealable, at least “where the grounds for attacking the decision to institute inter partes review consist of questions that are closely tied to the application and interpretation of statutes...