EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

06.13.18

When the USPTO Grants Patents in Defiance of 35 U.S.C. § 101 the Courts Will Eventually Squash These Anyway

Posted in America, Courtroom, Law, Patents at 1:35 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Squashed again and again, but many examiners refuse to learn their lessons

Squash player

Summary: Software/abstract patents, as per § 101 (Section 101) which relates to Alice Corp v CLS Bank at the US Supreme Court, are not valid in the United States, albeit one typically has to pay a fortune for a court battle to show it because the patent office (USPTO) is still far too lenient and careless

THE USPTO, together with the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), isn’t what it used to be. PTAB increasingly gets involved in examination itself, instructing examiners to reject applications while habitually citing 35 U.S.C. § 101 (we used to give many examples of that, but we stopped some months ago). This means that it’s already getting a lot harder for examiners to grant software patents unless they’re disguised using vague buzzwords (in the US it’s nowadays fashionable to add words like “cloud” or “blockchain”).

“…it’s hugely expensive (if not infeasible) to legally challenge entire pools like MPEG-LA’s.”Oppositions to US patents or patent applications appear to be on the rise (we have not seen all the associated figures*) and a couple of days ago we wrote about opposition to Google. Google is “trying to patent software,” according to a new article which says that the “software in question is a compression technique called asymmetric numeral systems (ANS), and was devised by a computer scientist at Jagiellonian University in Poland, Jarek Duda, who says that he invented it in 2014.”

Oddly enough, the EPO allowed compression algorithms to be patented, as Benjamin Henrion noted a few days ago in relation to this story. But would such patents survive a court’s challenge? We very much doubt it, but such patents typically get bundled together with other software patents inside patent pools; it’s hugely expensive (if not infeasible) to legally challenge entire pools like MPEG-LA‘s.

Anyway, the US courts will probably make up for the USPTO’s failures when it comes to handling of such patents. In Blackberry v Facebook, based on this new article, it seems apparent that Facebook knows software patents are worthless, so citing Alice it challenges the very validity of BlackBerry’s patents, no matter the alleged infringement thereof:

Facebook has turned to familiar counsel to defend a high-profile patent attack by BlackBerry Ltd.

Cooley partners Heidi Keefe, Mark Weinstein and Michael Rhodes say that four of the nine BlackBerry patents, asserted in March against Facebook messaging and notification technology, are eligible for patent protection under Section 101. The same triumvirate has represented Facebook in virtually all of its patent litigation.

The patents are directed at “ancient concepts—who gets a message, how it is sent and the manner of notification,” states Facebook’s motion to dismiss, filed Friday and signed by Keefe. “They take abstract concepts and apply them ‘on a computer.’ This is not enough to be patent-eligible.”

The 31-page motion includes visual aids, a staple of Keefe’s advocacy, including stock photos of an information kiosk at a shopping center and a stack of “while you were out” message pads.

[...]

Facebook’s motion to dismiss is premised on the Supreme Court’s Alice decision, which has been used to defeat numerous software technology patent suits at an early stage. But the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently held that Alice motions can involve fact issues that must be decided by juries. BlackBerry’s complaint includes detailed allegations that its inventions are not “well-understood, routine or conventional.”

Much of the press focuses on Facebook patents right now (so far this week; see [1-4] at the bottom), albeit not because of these patents but because of privacy concerns. There’s a similar discussion about Uber trying to patent software in spite of software patents being bunk and patent-ineligible in the US. To quote:

As a matter of good practice, tech companies typically patent every idea they come up with, regardless of whether or not they plan to implement it. And with good reason, patent trolls love targeting tech firms in jurisdictions that tend to give frivolous lawsuits far more leeway than they otherwise deserve. Consequently, it’s not uncommon to come across downright bizarre patents that will never see the light of day. At the same time, sometimes you come across a quirky patent that is equal parts crazy and equal parts genius. A recent patent filing from Uber seems to encompass just that.

Uber’s patent merely describes the assessment of data gathered through means which are peripheral to the software. Section 101 would almost certainly void such a patent.

How about USAA’s lawsuit? There has been lots of attention paid to it.

As we noted two days ago, USAA is sometimes a patent bully that uses what seems to be software/abstract patents. USAA is sometimes on the receiving end of patent lawsuits and is hoarding software patents [1, 2, 3, 4, 5]. This latest lawsuit has since then been covered in general news sites that say “Wall Street giant, Wells Fargo (WFC), in the spotlight once again after USAA accuses the former of patent infringement.”

We now see this also in niche sites about payments and American Banker, which is also quite mainstream.

As we argued on Sunday, nothing suggests that anything concrete was patented, but it’s up for judges to decide. Section 101 comes to mind. Judge Bryson has just dealt with 35 U.S.C. Section 101 albeit not in the context of software but of “claiming patent protection for a natural law.” (Pernix Ireland Pain Ltd. et al v Alvogen Malta Operations Ltd.)

As Docket Navigator summed it up:

The court denied defendant’s motion to reconsider an earlier order granting plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment that the asserted claims of its pain treatment patents did not encompass unpatentable subject matter.

It isn’t about software but about Section 101, which also encompasses decisions such as Mayo.

Either way, there are always those desperate and delusional patent law firms out there which ‘pull a Berkheimer‘ any time Section 101 gets brought up, insinuating — rightly or wrongly — that evidence is lacking/insufficient. Dechert LLP’s Robert D. Rhoad and Michael A. Fisher are the latest to attempt to ‘pull a Berkheimer‘ (a Federal Circuit decision from several months back). Here’s what they wrote; the background is of relevance:

In 2014, the Supreme Court established a two-prong test for determining whether a patented invention claims patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101: first, courts ask whether the claim is directed to a patent-ineligible concept—i.e., a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea; and if it is, they then search the claim for an “inventive concept” that is “sufficient to ensure that the patent in practice amounts to significantly more than a patent upon the [ineligible concept] itself.” Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014). Under the second prong, if the limitations of the claim only involve “‘well-understood, routine, conventional activit[ies]’ previously known to the industry,” it lacks the required “inventive concept.” Id. at 2359. Since Alice, district courts have been invalidating an unprecedented number of patents on § 101 grounds at the pleadings stage or on summary judgment.

At the end, in spite of Berkheimer barely being brought up and accepted by judges, they say this:

Accused infringers can still cite numerous Federal Circuit cases affirming the invalidation of patents at the pleadings or summary judgment stage, and the court has stated that it casts no doubt on the propriety of those cases. See, e.g., Berkheimer II, 2018 WL 2437140, at *3. However, the Berkheimer and Aatrix line of decisions give patentees a powerful tool to fight against invalidation of their patents before trial.

Well, how often have Berkheimer and Aatrix been used successfully by the plaintiff? Almost never. Or almost a handful of times perhaps, i.e. perhaps once a month. Those who resort to Berkheimer and Aatrix as a sort of “appeal to authority” clearly don’t know what they’re talking about or are deliberately lying. Virtually nothing has changed for the better as far as lawyers are concerned. No ‘pendulum’ has ‘swung back’, unless one asks wishful thinkers and think tanks like IAM.
______
* It should be noted that oppositions are also soaring in Europe and by year’s end it’s expected/estimated that patent filings will have declined in the US.

Related/contextual items from the news:

  1. Facebook Tells Congress It Hasn’t Used Eye Tracking Patents
  2. Facebook DENIES it’s building eye-tracking software despite holding two patents for the technology
  3. Facebook denies building eye-tracking software but says if it ever does, it will keep privacy in mind
  4. Facebook denies building eye-tracking software

    Facebook denied building eye-tracking software in its response to questions from Congress released Monday but said if it ever did build out the technology, it would take privacy into account.

    The social media company holds at least two patents for detecting eye movements and emotions, which it said “is one way that we could potentially reduce consumer friction and add security for people when they log into Oculus or access Oculus content.” Oculus is a virtual reality platform that Facebook bought in 2014.

    The company provided a written response to unanswered questions from Congress on its data use, privacy policy and its ad-based business model. Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg was asked about its technologies and potential uses by lawmakers during an appearance before Congress in April.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 11/12/2018: Tails 3.11, New Firefox, FreeBSD 12.0

    Links for the day



  2. Number of Filings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) Highest in Almost Two Years

    Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) inter partes reviews (IPRs), which [cref 113718 typically invalidate software patents by citing 35 U.S.C. § 101], are withstanding negative rhetoric and hostility from Iancu



  3. With 'Brexit' in a Lot of Headlines Team UPC Takes the Unitary Patent Lies up a Notch

    Misinformation continues to run like water; people are expected to believe that the UPC, an inherently EU-centric construct, can magically come to fruition in the UK (or in Europe as a whole)



  4. The EPO Not Only Abandoned the EPC But Also the Biotech Directive

    Last week's decision (T1063/18, EPO Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04) shows that there's still a long way to go before the Office and the Organisation as a whole fulfil their obligation to those who birthed the Organisation in the first placeLast week's decision (T1063/18, EPO Technical Board of Appeal 3.3.04) shows that there's still a long way to go before the Office and the Organisation as a whole fulfil their obligation to those who birthed the Organisation in the first place



  5. Patents on Abstract Things and on Life (or Patents Which Threaten Lives) Merely Threaten the Very Legitimacy of Patent Offices, Including EPO

    Patent Hubris and maximalism pose a threat or a major risk to the very system that they claim to be championing; by reducing the barrier to entry (i.e. introducing low-quality or socially detrimental patents) they merely embolden ardent critics who demand patent systems as a whole be abolished; the EPO is nowadays a leading example of it



  6. Links 10/12/2018: Linux 4.20 RC6 and Git 2.20

    Links for the day



  7. US Courts Make the United States' Patent System Sane Again

    35 U.S.C. § 101 (Section 101), the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and other factors are making the patent system in the US a lot more sane



  8. Today's USPTO Grants a Lot of Fake Patents, Software Patents That Courts Would Invalidate

    The 35 U.S.C. § 101 effect is very much real; patents on abstract/nonphysical ideas get invalidated en masse (in courts/PTAB) and Director Andrei Iancu refuses to pay attention as if he's above the law and court rulings don't apply to him



  9. A Month After Microsoft Claimed Patent 'Truce' Its Patent Trolls Keep Attacking Microsoft's Rivals

    Microsoft's legal department relies on its vultures (to whom it passes money and patents) to sue its rivals; but other than that, Microsoft is a wonderful company!



  10. Good News: US Supreme Court Rejects Efforts to Revisit Alice, Most Software Patents to Remain Worthless

    35 U.S.C. § 101 will likely remain in tact for a long time to come; courts have come to grips with the status quo, as even the Federal Circuit approves the large majority of invalidations by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) panels, initiated by inter partes reviews (IPRs)



  11. Florian Müller's Article About SEPs and the EPO

    Report from the court in Munich, where the EPO is based



  12. EPO Vice-President Željko Topić in New Article About Corruption in Croatia

    The Croatian newspaper 7Dnevno has an outline of what Željko Topić has done in Croatia and in the EPO in Munich; it argues that this seriously erodes Croatia's national brand/identity



  13. The Quality of European Patents Continues to Deteriorate Under António Campinos and Software Patents Are Advocated Every Day

    The EPC in the European Patent Office and 35 U.S.C. § 101 in the USPTO annul most if not all software patents; under António Campinos, however, software patents are being granted in Europe and the USPTO exploits similar tricks



  14. Team UPC is Still Spreading False Rumours in an Effort to Trick Politicians and Pressure Judges

    Abuses at the European Patent Office, political turmoil and an obvious legislative coup by a self-serving occupation that produces nothing have already doomed the Unitary Patent or Unified Patent Court (UPC); so now we deal with complete fabrications from Team UPC as they're struggling to make something out of nothing, anonymously smearing opposition to the UPC and anonymously making stuff up



  15. Patents on Life and Patents That Kill the Poor Would Only Delegitimise the European Patent Office

    After Mayo, Myriad and other SCOTUS cases (the basis of 35 U.S.C. § 101) the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is reluctant to grant patents on life; the European Patent Office (EPO), however, goes in the opposite direction, even in defiance of the European Patent Convention



  16. EPO 'Untapped Potential'

    "Campinos is diligently looking for ways to further increase the Office’s output without increasing the number of examiners," says the EPO-FLIER team



  17. Links 9/12/2018: New Linux Stable Releases (Notably Linux 4.19.8), RC Coming, and Unifont 11.0.03

    Links for the day



  18. Links 8/12/2018: Mesa 18.3.0, Mageia 7 Beta, WordPress 5.0

    Links for the day



  19. The European Patent Organisation is Like a Private Club and Roland Grossenbacher is Back in It

    In the absence of Benoît Battistelli quality control at the EPO is still not effective; patents are being granted like the sole goal is to increase so-called 'production' (or profit), appeals are being subjected to threats from Office management, and external courts (courts that assess patents outside the jurisdiction of the Office/Organisation) are being targeted with a long-sought replacement like the Unified Patent Court, or UPC (Unitary Patent)



  20. Links 7/12/2018: GNU Guix, GuixSD 0.16.0, GCC 7.4, PHP 7.3.0 Released

    Links for the day



  21. The Federal Circuit's Decision on Ancora Technologies v HTC America is the Rare Exception, Not the Norm

    Even though the PTAB does not automatically reject every patent when 35 U.S.C. § 101 gets invoked we're supposed to think that somehow things are changing in favour of patent maximalists; but all they do is obsess over something old (as old as a month ago) and hardly controversial



  22. The European Patent Office Remains a Lawless Place Where Judges Are Afraid of the Banker in Chief

    With the former banker Campinos replacing the politician Battistelli and seeking to have far more powers it would be insane for the German Constitutional Court to ever allow anything remotely like the UPC; sites that are sponsored by Team UPC, however, try to influence outcomes, pushing patent maximalism and diminishing the role of patent judges



  23. Many of the Same People Are Still in Charge of the European Patent Office Even Though They Broke the Law

    "EPO’s art collection honoured with award," the EPO writes, choosing to distract from what actually goes on at the Office and has never been properly dealt with



  24. Links 6/12/2018: FreeNAS 11.2, Mesa 18.3 Later Today, Fedora Elections

    Links for the day



  25. EPO, in Its Patent Trolls-Infested Forum, Admits It is Granting Bogus Software Patents Under the Guise of 'Blockchain'

    Yesterday's embarrassing event of the EPO was a festival of the litigation giants and trolls, who shrewdly disguise patents on algorithms using all sorts of fashionable words that often don't mean anything (or deviate greatly from their original meanings)



  26. The Patent Litigation Bubble is Imploding in the US While the UPC Dies in Europe

    The meta-industry which profits from feuds, disputes, threats and blackmail isn't doing too well; even in Europe, where it worked hard for a number of years to institute a horrible litigation system which favours global plaintiffs (patent trolls, opportunists and monopolists), these things are going up in flames



  27. Links 5/12/2018: Epic Games Store, CrossOver 18.1.0, Important Kubernetes Patch

    Links for the day



  28. Links 4/12/2018: LibrePCB 0.1.0, SQLite 3.26.0, PhysX Code

    Links for the day



  29. EPO Management Keeps Embarrassing Itself, UPC More Dead Than Before, and Nokia Turns Aggressive

    The EPO’s race to the bottom of patent quality continues, it’s now complemented by direct association with patent trolls and law stands in their way (for they repeatedly violate the law)



  30. The Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) and IBM Are Part of the Software Patents Problem in the United States

    IBM's special role in lobbying for software patents (and against PTAB) needs to be highlighted; even Ethereum’s co-founder isn't happy about IBM's meddling in the blockchain space (with help from Hyperledger/Linux Foundation)


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts