alice, mayo, ultramercial

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1779 Ex Parte Werner et al 12158558 - (D) WARREN 103 Barnes & Thornburg LLP (Roche) JARRETT, LORE RAMILLANO

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Tinti 12387853 - (D) KERINS 103 James E. Curry GRAHAM, MARK S

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1726 Ex Parte Olbrich et al 12306853 - (D) FRANKLIN 103 Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP (WM) TAKEUCHI, YOSHITOSHI

1771 Ex Parte Iyer et al 12784696 - (D) PAK 103 MENDELSOHN, DRUCKER, & DUNLEAVY, P.C. GRAHAM, CHANTEL LORAN

1792 Ex Parte Bekele 12828461 - (D) NAGUMO 103 SEALED AIR CORPORATION THAKUR, VIREN A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2898 Ex Parte Yamazaki et al 12076994 - (D) WARREN 103 Robinson Intellectual Property Law Office, P.C. SHOOK, DANIEL P

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3711 Ex Parte Levin 10787486 - (D) BROWNE 101 GRACE J FISHEL COLLINS, DOLORES R

The Supreme Court has set forth “a framework for distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts.” Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l., 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014) (citing Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs, Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1294 (2012). According to the Supreme Court’s framework, we must first determine whether the claims at issue are directed to one of those concepts (i.e., laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas). Id. If so, we must secondly “consider the elements of each claim both individually and ‘as an ordered combination’ to determine whether the additional elements ‘transform the nature of the claim’ into a patent-eligible application.” Id. The Supreme Court characterizes the second step of the analysis as “a search for an
‘inventive concept’ — i.e., an element or combination of elements that is ‘sufficient to ensure that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent upon the [ineligible concept] itself.”’ Id. ...

Like the claim at issue in Ultramercial, “[t]his ordered combination of steps recites an abstraction” as it has no particular concrete or tangible form. Ultramercial, Inc. and Ultramercial LLC v. Hulu , LLC and Wildtangent, Inc., 2014 WL 5904902, 4 (Fed. Cir. 2014). ...

“The second step in the [Alice] analysis requires us to determine whether the claims do significantly more than simply describe that abstract method.” Ultramercial at 5 (citing Mayo at 1297). Our reviewing court instructs us that “[w]e must examine the limitations of the claims to determine whether the claims contain an ‘inventive concept’ to ‘transform’ the claimed abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter. Alice at 2357 (quoting Mayo at 1298). The transformation of an abstract idea into patent eligible subject matter “requires ‘more than simply stat[ing] the [abstract idea] while adding the words ‘apply it.’” Id. (quoting Mayo at 1294). Those “additional features” must be more than “well-understood, routine, conventional activity.” Mayo at 1298.

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2171 DEEP SKY SOFTWARE, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant v. SOUTHWEST AIRLINES CO. Requester and Respondent Ex Parte 6738770 et al 09/823,406 95000625 - (D) BRANCH 102/103 PROCOPIO, CORY, HARGREAVES & SAVITCH LLP Third Party Requester: THOMPSON & KNIGHT, L.L.P. WOOD, WILLIAM H original AL HASHEMI, SANA A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2624 APPLE INC. Requester v. S3 GRAPHICS CO. LTD. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 6775417 et al 10/052,613 95000585 - (D) DILLON 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. Third Party Requester: Novak Druce & Quigg TRAN, HENRY N original DO, ANH HONG

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 GOOGLE INC. Requester v. INVENTOR HOLDINGS, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 6199014 et al 08/997,677 95002031 - (D) CURCURI 103 Ascenda Law Group, PC Third Party Requester: Sterne Kessler Goldstein & Fox, PLLC LEE, CHRISTOPHER E original ISSING, GREGORY C

alice

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 1600 Biotechnology and Organic Chemistry
1612 Ex Parte Gellman et al 10933987 - (D) McCOLLUM 103 Dewitt Ross & Stevens SC PACKARD, BENJAMIN J

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2111 Ex Parte GELINAS et al 12429655 - (D) BUI 102 PATTERSON THUENTE PEDERSEN, P.A. KIM, KENNETH S

2178 Ex Parte Garrett et al 11679597 - (D) PAULRAJ 112(2)/102 HOFFMAN WARNICK LLC VAUGHN, GREGORY J

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2891 Ex Parte Massetti 12133780 - (D) OWENS 103 LATHROP & GAGE LLP WRIGHT, TUCKER J

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3662 Ex Parte Meyers et al 12709657 - (D) BROWN 103 HONEYWELL/FOGG NGUYEN, NGA X

3695 Ex Parte Shaw et al 11031287 - (D) LORIN 102 FOLEY & LARDNER LLP OYEBISI, OJO O

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3752 Ex Parte DENZLER 12891431 - (D) GREENHUT 102/103 VOLPE AND KOENIG, P.C. REIS, RYAN ALEXANDER

3761 Ex Parte Matson et al 12239103 - (D) ADAMS 103 Covidien MARCETICH, ADAM M

AFFIRMED-IN-PART 
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2169 Ex Parte Espelien 11581526 - (D) CHUNG 112(1)/103 112(1)/103 PATENTS+TMS, P.C. HU, JENSEN

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2454 Ex Parte Bozionek et al 11587202 - (D) BOUDREAU 103 103 SIEMENS CORPORATION KHAN, AFTAB N

2486 Ex Parte Gordon 11412669 - (D) KUMAR 103 102 BGL/Broadcom RAO, ANAND SHASHIKANT

Should there be further prosecution of this application (including any review for allowance), the Examiner may wish to review the claims for compliance under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in light of the recently issued preliminary examination instructions on patent eligible subject matter. See “Preliminary Examination Instructions in view of the Supreme Court Decision in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, et al.,” Memorandum to the Examining Corps, June 25, 2014.

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1722 Ex Parte Vest 12267642 - (D) PAK 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 CARMODY TORRANCE SANDAK & HENNESSEY LLP ROBINSON, CHANCEITY N

1741 Ex Parte Fournier et al 10989416 - (D) HASTINGS 103 BUCHANAN, INGERSOLL & ROONEY PC LAZORCIK, JASON L

1742 Ex Parte Kirk et al 11759442 - (D) GARRIS 103 3M INNOVATIVE PROPERTIES COMPANY DANIELS, MATTHEW J

1747 Ex Parte Marchini et al 12311432 - (D) BEST 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 103 FINNEGAN, HENDERSON, FARABOW, GARRETT & DUNNER LLP ROGERS, MARTIN K

1771 Ex Parte Garner et al 11560489 - (D) KRATZ 103 INFINEUM USA L.P. PO, MING CHEUNG

1788 Ex Parte Yakovleva et al 11870544 - (D) KRATZ 102/103 MYERS BIGEL SIBLEY & SAJOVEC FERRE, ALEXANDRE F

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2138 Ex Parte Allen et al 11953201 - (D) CHUNG 103 Winstead, P.C. KROFCHECK, MICHAEL C

2184 Ex Parte Pai et al 10736125 - (D) HOMERE 102 Foley & Lardner LLP/ Broadcom Corporation WONG, TITUS

2194 Ex Parte Radzykewycz et al 11361806 - (D) DANG 103 FAY KAPLUN & MARCIN, LLP ANYA, CHARLES E

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2421 Ex Parte Campagna et al 12050605 - (D) FINK 103 SHERIDAN ROSS P.C. CHOWDHURY, SUMAIYA A

2426 Ex Parte Holtz et al 10208810 - (D) WORMMEESTER 102/103 Thomson Licensing LLC PENG, HSIUNGFEI

2453 Ex Parte Bell et al 11755490 - (D) HOMERE 112(2) 102/103 (SimDesk) WONG, CABELLO, LUTSCH, RUTHERFORD NGUYEN, THUONG

2492 Ex Parte Fadili et al 11507551 - (D) HOFF 103 Carmen Patti Law Group, LLC PAN, PEILIANG

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2642 Ex Parte Nelson 11553131 - (D) WORMMEESTER 102 RENNER, OTTO, BOISSELLE & SKLAR, LLP SCHWARTZ, JOSHUA L

2657 Ex Parte Suriyanarayanan 11913313 - (D) HOFF 101/102 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY PULLIAS, JESSE SCOTT

2683 Ex Parte Devaux 11660501 - (D) FRAHM 103 YOUNG & THOMPSON SAMSON, SARA B

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2828 Ex Parte TSENG et al 12120618 - (D) ROESEL 102/103 WPAT, PC KING, JOSHUA

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3622 Ex Parte Wyker 11242268 - (D) CRAWFORD 103 SCHWARTZ LAW FIRM, P.C. DURAN, ARTHUR D

3627 Ex Parte Allocca et al 10916772 - (D) BAYAT 103 SEED INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP PLLC ROJAS, HAJIME S

3632 Ex Parte Love 12019253 - (D) BROWNE 103 FREUDENBERG-NOK GENERAL PARTNERSHIP SMITH, NKEISHA

3653 Ex Parte Wang et al 12019512 - (D) HILL 102/103 DENTONS US LLP RODRIGUEZ, JOSEPH C

REEXAMINATION

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 2600 Communications
2617 VOLKSWAGEN GROUP OF AMERICA, INC. Requester v. AFFINITY LABS OF TEXAS, LLC Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7,778,595 et al 12/015,320 95001782 - (D) BRANCH 103 TROP, PRUNER & HU, P.C. Third Party Requester: Kenyon & Kenyon LLP BASEHOAR, ADAM L original WASHINGTON, ERIKA ALISE

alice, bancorp

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2433 Ex Parte Kahl 10513652 - (D) RUGGIERO 103 37 C.F.R. § 41.50(b) 101 MARTINE PENILLA GROUP, LLP TRAN, ELLEN C

We find that claims 1–8, 11, and 13–25 are directed to a mathematical algorithm for calculating the modular inverse of a value, i.e., an abstract idea. The Supreme Court has recently reaffirmed that fundamental concepts, by themselves, are ineligible abstract ideas. Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. ___, No. 13-298, slip op. 1 at 10 (June 19, 2014). We recognize that independent claims 1, 14, and 18 conclude with an intended use clause “used for a cryptographic application” that applies the mathematical calculation steps to a specific application. A claim may be patent eligible if it includes additional inventive features such that the claim scope does not solely capture the abstract idea. Alice Corp., 573 U.S. ___, slip op. at 6. A claim reciting an abstract idea, however, does not become eligible “merely by adding the words ‘apply it.’” Bancorp Servs., LLC v. Sun Life Assurance Co. of Can. (U.S.), 687 F.3d 1266, 1276 (Fed. Cir. 2012).

2442 Ex Parte Basham et al 12039496 - (D) McCARTNEY 103 IBM CORP. (WIP) c/o WALDER INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW, P.C. AILES, BENJAMIN A

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2853 Ex Parte Bastani et al 12253133 - (D) NAGUMO 102/103 37 CFR 41.50(b) 112(b)/112(f) HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY HUFFMAN, JULIAN D

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2465 Ex Parte Wood 11609096 - (D) BOUDREAU 103 103 VERIZON ZHU, BO HUI ALVIN

AFFIRMED
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1764 Ex Parte Ebata et al 12314154 - (D) DELMENDO 103/obviousness-type double patenting FOLEY AND LARDNER LLP KRYLOVA, IRINA

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Kleine et al 11493932 - (D) McKEOWN 103 EDELL, SHAPIRO & FINNAN, LLC SCHNIREL, ANDREW B

alice, warner

custom search

REVERSED
Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2158 Ex Parte Sylvain 12047138 - (D) BUI 103 37 C.F.R. 41.50(b) 101 Avaya Inc. and Withrow & Terranova PENG, HUAWEN A

The Supreme Court has recently reaffirmed that fundamental concepts, by themselves, are ineligible abstract ideas. Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. ___, No. 13-298, slip op. 1 at 10 (June 19, 2014).

2175 Ex Parte Chakra et al 11846586 - (D) HULSE 102(e)/103 CRGO LAW STEVEN M. GREENBERG HO, RUAY L

Tech Center 2400 Networking, Multiplexing, Cable, and Security
2441 Ex Parte Matsen et al 12435993 - (D) BROWNE 103 HONEYWELL/STW PATEL, HITESHKUMAR R

We have been instructed that “we may not resolve doubts in favor of the Patent Office determination when there are deficiencies in the record as to the necessary factual bases supporting its legal conclusion of obviousness.” In re Warner, 379 F.2d 1011, 1017 (CCPA 1967).

Warner, In re, 379 F.2d 1011, 154 USPQ 173 (CCPA 1967) 2142

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2625 Ex Parte Longe et al 11871651 - (D) DIXON 103 Glenn Patent Group - Nuance c/o Perkins Coie LLP SHAPIRO, LEONID

2675 Ex Parte Abello 10513007 - (D) JENKS 103 HEWLETT-PACKARD COMPANY WASHINGTON, JAMARES

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2892 Ex Parte Pocas et al 10584052 - (D) TIMM 103 OBLON, SPIVAK, MCCLELLAND MAIER & NEUSTADT, L.L.P. JONES, ERIC W

Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3638 Ex Parte Maier-Hunke 12223037 - (D) ASTORINO 103 Mark P. Stone KIM, SHIN H

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3723 Ex Parte Lujan et al 11115065 - (D) SMEGAL 102(e) DOCKET CLERK MORGAN, EILEEN P

AFFIRMED 
Tech Center 1700 Chemical & Materials Engineering
1767 Ex Parte Charati et al 11612774 - (D) WARREN 103 CANTOR COLBURN LLP STANLEY, JANE L

Tech Center 2100 Computer Architecture and Software
2157 Ex Parte Espino 12836794 - (D) SIU 103 VERIZON SHECHTMAN, CHERYL MARIA

2159 Ex Parte Bhatia et al 11369792 - (D) FETTING 103 Baker Botts LLP CONYERS, DAWAUNE A

Tech Center 2600 Communications
2649 Ex Parte Hayek et al 11354704 - (D) COURTENAY 103 STERNE, KESSLER, GOLDSTEIN & FOX P.L.L.C. VO, NGUYEN THANH

2655 Ex Parte Suzuki et al 11117608 - (D) PAULRAJ 103 BIRCH STEWART KOLASCH & BIRCH, LLP PAUL, DISLER

2674 Ex Parte Fukushima 11656310 - (D) JENKS 102 EDWARDS WILDMAN PALMER LLP MUSHAMBO, MARTIN

Tech Center 2800 Semiconductors, Electrical and Optical Systems and Components
2842 Ex Parte Nauta 12282240 - (D) NAGUMO 112(2)/103 102/103 NXP B.V. HILTUNEN, THOMAS J

2854 Ex Parte Mayer 11637593 - (D) KATZ 112(2)/103 LERNER GREENBERG STEMER LLP SIMMONS, JENNIFER E

Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3748 Ex Parte Doring 11582913 - (D) BROWNE 112(1)/102(e)/103 ROBERT W. BECKER & ASSOCIATES TRAN, DIEM T

3766 Ex Parte Bradley 12173169 - (D) FREDMAN 102/103 VISTA IP LAW GROUP LLP/BSC - NEUROMODULATION PORTER, JR, GARY A

3753 Ex Parte LeBlanc et al 12000619 - (D) HILL 112(1)/112(2)/102 KELLEY DRYE & WARREN LLP ROST, ANDREW J

REEXAMINATION

REVERSED
Tech Center 3600 Transportation, Construction, Electronic Commerce, Agriculture, National Security, and License & Review
3622 NATIONAL SEMICONDUCTOR CORPORATION Requester v. eTOOL DEVELOPMENT, INC. Patent Owner and Appellant Ex Parte 7113919 et al 09/643,841 95000533 - (D) HOFF 102(e)/103 Riverside Law LLP Third Party Requester: MORRISON & FOERSTER LLP BONSHOCK, DENNIS G original CARLSON, JEFFREY D

AFFIRMED-IN-PART
Tech Center 3700 Mechanical Engineering, Manufacturing, and Products & Design
3736 BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL, INC. Requester, Respondent v. WORLWIDE MEDICAL TECHNOLOGIES, LLC Patent Owner, Appellant Ex Parte 6554760 et al 09/983,463 95001988 - (D) SONG 103 112(1)/103 NIXON & VANDERHYE, PC Third Party Requester: BEST MEDICAL INTERNATIONAL, INC. FLANAGAN, BEVERLY MEINDL original GILBERT, SAMUEL G