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

08.19.18

Alice/35 U.S.C. § 101 and PTAB Are Here to Stay and Even Their Critics (Patent Maximalists) Have Come to Accept That

Posted in America, Law, Patents at 5:31 pm by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Capitol building

Summary: Taking stock of the latest PTAB news and rants; the latter has become scarce because efforts to undermine PTAB have all failed

THE recent changes at the USPTO were relatively minor. Guidelines have barely changed, the chief judge of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) is merely swapping seats, and the courts continue to rule pretty consistently on patent matters. There’s no real room for profound change and this, in a strange sort of way, is a good thing because Alice/35 U.S.C. § 101, frequently enforced by PTAB, renders a lot of software patents obsolete. The Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirms.

“There’s no real room for profound change and this, in a strange sort of way, is a good thing because Alice/35 U.S.C. § 101, frequently enforced by PTAB, renders a lot of software patents obsolete.”Over the past week we’ve been patiently watching new cases and new decisions. We’re also still watching events like this one about PTAB; a few months ago there were many anti-PTAB events, but Oil States more or less ended that. PTAB is here to stay and patent maximalists are slowly learning to accept that.

“SCOTUS is instead looking into matters such as damage calculations and litigation venue, along with PTAB itself (two decisions about it earlier this summer).”What about 35 U.S.C. § 101? It hasn’t really changed. There are talks about amending guidelines, but nothing substantial has changed and SCOTUS refuses to revisit the matter. SCOTUS is instead looking into matters such as damage calculations and litigation venue, along with PTAB itself (two decisions about it earlier this summer). 3 days ago San Antonio Business Journal wrote an update about the USAA case, wherein the underlying patent claims are currently being disputed. How typical. How depressing to patent maximalists this must be…

Steve Brachmann wrote about BSG Tech LLC v. BuySeasons, Inc. — a case that we mentioned some days ago because it deals with software patents and Section 101 at a high level. Watchtroll also seems rather befuddled and confused by the fact that CAFC doesn’t give a damn about the Berkheimer hype and still throws away/tosses out any such lousy software patents.

“On Wednesday, August 15th,” Brachmann wrote, “the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision in BSG Tech LLC v. BuySeasons, Inc. which upheld a decision by the district court to invalidate patent claims owned by BSG Tech as patent-ineligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Federal Circuit panel of Circuit Judges Jimmie Reyna, Evan Wallach and Todd Hughes found that the district court correctly determined that patent claim asserted by BSG Tech were invalid as abstract ideas lacking any inventive step under the Alice/Mayo framework.”

Well, get used to it.

Knobbe Martens (a law firm, not a person) soon wrote about it as well. A bunch of lawyers said this:

Under step one of Alice, the Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that the asserted claims were directed to the abstract idea of considering historical usage information while inputting data. The Federal Circuit found that this was not a method “necessarily rooted in computer technology in order to overcome a problem specifically arising in the realm of” wide access databases. DDR Holdings, LLC v. Hotels.com, L.P., 773 F.3d 1245, 1257 (Fed. Cir. 2014). Further, the Federal Circuit found that the claims were not saved from abstraction merely because they require a specific database structure that is more specific than a generic computer. Also, the Federal Circuit stated that the claims did not recite any improvement to the way in which databases store or organize information.

CAFC on PTAB inter partes reviews (IPRs) has truly transformed the way examiners operate; they think twice before granting software patents and we increasing read reports about rejections. Here’s a new CAFC decision regarding IPRs:

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit yesterday ruled that an inter partes review (IPR) filing is still subject to a time limitation even if a previous patent infringement claim has been dismissed.

In doing so, the Federal Circuit sided with Click-to-Call Technologies (CTC) and overturned a previous decision by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB).

According to section 315(b) of 35 USC, an IPR petition cannot be instituted if it is filed more than one year after the petitioner was served with a patent infringement complaint.

A blog post by Dennis Crouch also remarked on this:

In an unusual en banc footnote, the Federal Circuit has ruled that the litigation time-bar found in 35 U.S.C. § 315(b) applies even in cases where the plaintiff-patentee voluntarily dismisses the lawsuit without prejudice. Click-to-Call Tech., LP v. Ingenio, Inc. and Iancu (Fed. Cir. 2018).

“Court says the PTAB was wrong to decide that voluntary dismissal without prejudice of a civil action in which the complaint was served “does not trigger” the one-year time bar under Section 315(b),” Michael Loney wrote.

IPR proceedings will continue unabated and entities such as Unified Patents will file IPRs as they see fit.

Watchtroll posted a new example of it earlier today. “Plano, TX-based patent owner American Vehicular Sciences LLC recently filed a petition for rehearing en banc with the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. The petition relates to its appeal of inter partes review (IPR) proceedings conducted at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), which initiated as the result of a petition filed by Unified Patents,” Watchtroll said.

American Vehicular Sciences, as we noted back in June, is part of a Microsoft-connected patent troll. Will it be disarmed?

Certainly we shall see PTAB-bashing in the future, but the frequency of that has greatly diminished. Here’s Anticipat on Section 101 and PTAB:

As reported in today’s recap email, in Ex Parte GELFAND et al (Aug. 2, 2018), the Board reversed a lack of utility rejection. This continues a longstanding trend of the Board frequently reversing such rejections.

This is nonsense, there’s no such trend. Anticipat is a malicious propaganda site against Section 101 and PTAB, just like Bilski Blog and Watchtroll, IAM etc. There has barely been, at best, a minuscule if not negligible difference and that too can be explained differently.

There are still some PTAB-hostile events on the way; earlier today Patent Docs advertised webinars of the patent microcosm on “PTAB Proceedings on Bio/Pharma Patents”, the Intellectual Property Owners Association (IPO) on “Post-Grant Proceedings” and the scavengers from the U.S. Chamber of Commerce (malicious lobby group) lobbying lawmakers on patents:

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce Global Innovation Policy Center (GIPC) and the South Dade Chamber of Commerce and the Glen Ellyn, Lombard, Western DuPage, and Wheaton Chambers of Commerce will host two intellectual property and innovation business roundtables in Florida and Illinois

Being from the Chamber of Commerce, it’s obvious whose agenda that will advance.

Patent Docs also advertised more benign webinars such as this, but the site as a whole has been full of PTAB-bashing. Their bias is impossible to hide. Then again, their frustration too has become impossible to hide.

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. Science Minister Sam Gyimah and the EPO Are Eager to Attack Science by Bringing Patent Trolls to Europe/European Union and the United Kingdom

    Team UPC has managed to indoctrinate or hijack key positions, causing those whose job is to promote science to actually promote patent trolls and litigation (suppressing science rather than advancing it)



  2. USF Revisits EPO Abuses, Highlighting an Urgent Need for Action

    “Staff Representation Disciplinary Cases” — a message circulated at the end of last week — reveals the persistence of union-busting agenda and injustice at the EPO



  3. Links 14/11/2018: KDevelop 5.3, Omarine 5.3, Canonical Not for Sale

    Links for the day



  4. Second Day of EPOPIC: Yet More Promotion of Software Patents in Europe in Defiance of Courts, EPC, Parliament and Common Sense

    Using bogus interpretations of the EPC — ones that courts have repeatedly rejected — the EPO continues to grant bogus/fake/bunk patents on abstract ideas, then justifies that practice (when the audience comes from the litigation ‘industry’)



  5. Allegations That António Campinos 'Bought' His Presidency and is Still Paying for it

    Rumours persist that after Battistelli had rigged the election in favour of his compatriot nefarious things related to that were still visible



  6. WIPO Corruption and Coverup Mirror EPO Tactics

    Suppression of staff representatives and whistleblowers carries on at WIPO and the EPO; people who speak out about abuses are themselves being treated like abusers



  7. Links 13/11/2018: HPC Domination (Top 500 All GNU/Linux) and OpenStack News

    Links for the day



  8. The USPTO and EPO Pretend to Care About Patent Quality by Mingling With the Terms “Patent” and “Quality”

    The whole "patent quality" propaganda from EPO and USPTO management continues unabated; they strive to maintain the fiction that quality rather than money is their prime motivator



  9. Yannis Skulikaris Promotes Software Patents at EPOPIC, Defending the Questionable Practice Under António Campinos

    The reckless advocacy for abstract patents on mere algorithms from a new and less familiar face; the EPO is definitely eager to grant software patents and it explains to stakeholders how to do it



  10. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce is Working for Patent Trolls and Patent Maximalists

    The patent trolls' propagandists are joining forces and pushing for a patent system that is hostile to science, technology, and innovation in general (so as to enable a bunch of aggressive law firms to tax everybody)



  11. Team UPC, Fronting for Patent Trolls From the US, is Calling Facts “Resistance”

    The tactics of Team UPC have gotten so tastelessly bad and its motivation so shallow (extortion in Europe) that one begins to wonder why these people are willing to tarnish everything that's left of their reputation



  12. The Federal Circuit Bar Association (FCBA) Will Spread the Berkheimer Lie While Legal Certainty Associated With Patents Remains Low and Few Lawsuits Filed

    New figures regarding patent litigation in the United States (number of lawsuits) show a decrease by about a tenth in just one year; there's still no sign of software patents making any kind of return/rebound in the United States, contrary to lies told by the litigation 'industry' (those who profit from frivolous lawsuits/threats)



  13. Links 12/11/2018: Linux 4.20 RC2, Denuvo DRM Defeated Again

    Links for the day



  14. Automation of Searches Will Not Solve the Legitimacy Problem Caused by Patents Lust

    The false belief that better searches and so-called 'AI' can miraculously assess patents will simply drive/motivate bad decisions and already steers bad management towards patent maximalism (presumption of examination/validation where none actually exists)



  15. The Federal Circuit and PTAB Are Not Slowing Down; Patent Maximalists Claim It's 'Harassment' to Question a Patent's Validity

    There’s no sign of stopping when it comes to harassment of judges and courts; those who make a living from patent threats and litigation do anything conceivable to stop the ‘bloodbath’ of US patents which were never supposed to have been granted in the first place



  16. Patent Maximalists Will Latch Onto Return Mail v US Postal Service in an Effort to Weaken or Limit Post-Grant Reviews of US Patents

    An upcoming case, dealing with what governments can and cannot do with/to patents (specifically the US government and US patents), interests the litigation 'industry' because it loathes reviews of low-quality and/or controversial patents (these reviews discourage litigation or stop lawsuits early on in the cycle)



  17. Guest Post: EPO Spins Censorship of Staff Representation

    Another concrete example of Campinos' cynical story-telling



  18. Andrei Iancu and Laura Peter Are Two Proponents of Patent Trolls at the Top of the USPTO

    Patent offices do not seem to care about the law, about the courts, about judges and so on; all they care about is money (and litigation costs) and that’s a very major problem



  19. The Patent 'Industry' Wants Incitations and Feuds, Not Innovation and Collaboration

    The litigation giants and their drones keep insisting that they're interested in helping scientists; but sooner or later the real (productive) industry learns to kick them to the curb and work together instead of suing



  20. EPO 'Outsourcing' Rumours

    The EPO advertises jobs in Prague and Lisbon; this leads to speculations less than a year after António Campinos sent EU-IPO jobs to India (for cost reduction)



  21. Links 11/11/2018: Bison 3.2.1 and FreeBSD 12.0 Beta 4

    Links for the day



  22. Pro-Litigation Front Groups Like CIPA and Team UPC Control the EPO, Which Shamelessly Grants Software Patents

    With buzzwords and hype like "insurtech", "fintech", "blockchains" and "AI" the EPO (and to some degree the USPTO as well) looks to allow a very wide range of software patents; the sole goal is to grant millions of low-quality patents, creating unnecessary litigation in Europe



  23. Latest Loophole: To Get Software Patents From the EPO One Can Just Claim That They're 'on a Car'

    The EPO has a new 'study' (accompanied by an extensive media/PR campaign) that paints software as "SDV" if it runs on a car, celebrating growth of such software patents



  24. The Huge Cost of Wrongly-Granted European Patents, Recklessly Granted by the European Patent Office (EPO)

    It took 4 years for many thousands of people to have just one patent of Monsanto/Bayer revoked; what does that say about the impact of erroneous patent awards?



  25. Links 10/11/2018: Mesa 18.3 RC2, ‘Linux on DeX’ Beta and Windows Breaking Itself Again

    Links for the day



  26. Unified Patents Takes Aim at Velos Media SEPs, Passed From Patent Aggressor Qualcomm

    The latest endeavour from Unified Patents takes aim at notorious standard-essential patents (SEPs), which are not compatible with Free/Open Source software and are typically invalid as per 35 U.S.C. § 101 as well



  27. Stacked Panels of Front Groups Against PTAB and in Favour of Patents on Life/Nature

    So-called 'panels' where the opposition is occluded or excluded try to sell the impression that greatness comes from patent maximalism (overpatenting) rather than restriction based on merit and rational scope



  28. With Patent Trolls Like Finjan and Blackbird Tech out There, Microsoft in OIN Does Not Mean Safety

    With many patent trolls out there (Microsoft’s Intellectual Ventures alone has thousands of them) it’s not at all clear how Microsoft can honestly claim to have reached a “truce”; OIN deals with issues which last manifested/publicly revealed themselves a decade ago (Microsoft suing directly, not by proxy)



  29. Links 9/11/2018: Qt 5.12.0 Beta 4, Ubuntu On Samsung Galaxy Devices, Rust 1.30.1

    Links for the day



  30. Microsoft is Supporting Patent Trolls, Still. New Leadership at USPTO Gives Room for Concern.

    New statements from Microsoft's management (Andersen) serve to show that Microsoft hasn't really changed; it's just trying to sell "Azure IP Advantage", hoping that enough patent trolls with their dubious software patents will blackmail GNU/Linux users into adopting Azure for 'protection'


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