by Steve Driskill | Mar 10, 2016 | [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility
Wagering games are generally patent-ineligible abstract ideas unless they employ unconventional game elements, rather than conventional elements such as playing cards. Here, for example, a wagering game utilizing real or virtual standard playing cards was found to be...
by Steve Driskill | Dec 28, 2015 | [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility
The mere use of special-purpose hardware without providing implementation details is not sufficient to transform an otherwise abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter. Here, for example, although the court acknowledged that execution of a vehicle operator...
by Steve Driskill | Jun 23, 2015 | [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility
The “inventive concept” requirement for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §101 requires that the innovative mechanism for achieving an otherwise abstract idea must be recited in the claims and must involve more than merely generic data collection. Here, for example,...
by Steve Driskill | Jun 11, 2015 | [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility
Relying on a computer to perform otherwise routine tasks more quickly or more accurately is insufficient to render a claim patent eligible even when speed and accuracy is advantageous. Here, for example, a method of dynamic price optimization in an e-commerce...
by Steve Driskill | Dec 5, 2014 | [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility
In contrast to claims that are directed to “nothing more than the performance of an abstract business practice on the Internet or using a conventional computer,” claims that are “necessarily rooted in computer technology in order to overcome a problem specifically...
by Steve Driskill | Jun 19, 2014 | [sub] Alice step one, [sub] Alice step two, Subject Matter Eligibility
A wholly generic computer-implementation that does not “purport to improve the functioning of the computer itself” or “effect an improvement in any other technology or technical field” is insufficient to transform an abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention...