Bonum Certa Men Certa

More SCOTUS Patent Cases on Their Way, But Nothing That Will Change 35 U.S.C. ۤ 101/Alice

American pride



Summary: In spite of the continued assessment of patent law at the US Supreme Court (SCOTUS), things won't change in favour of the software patents lobby any time soon (if ever)

THE (arguably) most anticipated patent decision from SCOTUS is (probably) Oil States. Just under a year ago we saw yet more favourable (to patent reform) decisions from SCOTUS. Expect more of the same later this month or next month.



Another possible case (to reach SCOTUS) is a high-profile case regarding patents, but it not about patent scope (Alice has already settled much of that) or litigation venue scope (TC Heartland dealt with it last summer/spring). Earlier this week Patently-O wrote about it:

Helsinn’s petition for certiorari received strong support this week from a bevy of ten briefs amici. The missing element now is a call from the Supreme Court for the views of the Solicitor General (CVSG) and a resulting brief from the U.S. Government supporting the petition.

The Patent Act bars the patenting of inventions that were “on sale” prior to to the invention’s filing date. The question on appeal here is whether the AIA limited “on sale” to only include publicly available information — or instead do secret and confidential business deals also count as invalidating prior art (if ever discovered).


This case isn't of much interest to us, but still, it can help show where SCOTUS stands (or sits) on patents. Writing about this other case which isn't of much interest to us, SCOTUS Blog has just said:

On the first morning of the Supreme Court’s April session next week, the justices will return to problems of extraterritorial patent infringement, hearing argument in WesternGeco v Ion Geophysical Corp. For the third time in recent years, the court will consider Section 271 of the Patent Act. The statute was adopted in response to the court’s 1972 holding in Deepsouth Packing v Laitram Corp. that the Patent Act does not provide a remedy for overseas patent infringement. Deepsouth was an early example of a presumption against extraterritoriality, which has come to loom quite large in the Supreme Court’s recent jurisprudence. Traditionally, under that canon of construction, a statute applies only to conduct within the United States unless Congress explicitly indicates a contrary intent.


It doesn't matter what the outcome may be, this won't impact ۤ 101/Alice in any way whatsoever. We hope nothing will change ۤ 101 and as we'll show in our next post, the software patents lobby now attacks SCOTUS itself. Bullies will be bullies...

Michael Cottler and David Zimmer (Goodwin Procter) are meanwhile leaning on Berkheimer v HP Inc. (CAFC decision) in hope of weakening ۤ 101. Like the software patents lobbying blog, "Bilski Blog", Watchtroll now latches onto two words, "well-known", in order to try to weaken the potency of 35 U.S.C. ۤ 101 and prop up software patents. From their post:

In Exergen Corporation v. Kaz USA, No. 16-2315 (March 8, 2018), the Federal Circuit, in a split non-precedential opinion, affirmed a holding that Exergen’s claims directed to methods and apparatuses for detecting core body temperature were directed to patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. €§ 101. The Federal Circuit’s decision, like many of its recent €§ 101 decisions, raises many interesting issues, and we briefly address two of them.

[...]

And what is the difference between a technique that is merely “known” (e.g., a technique disclosed in that German thesis) and a technique that is well-known and conventional?


Aside from the fact that it's a non-precedential opinion, it barely affects anything at all when it comes to ۤ 101 decisions. These people just scrape the bottom of the barrel, knowing that SCOTUS is fine with ۤ 101 and is about to defend PTAB in Oil States.

Yesterday we saw Patently-O writing about another non-precedential opinion, this one regarding Funai. It's a new CAFC case where the "plaintiff’s four asserted patents to be invalid for claiming ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. On appeal, the Federal Circuit has affirmed."

With more background:

In a sweeping judgment,the N.D. Ill. district court dismissed Maxon’s infringement case — finding the claims of the plaintiff’s four asserted patents to be invalid for claiming ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. 101. On appeal, the Federal Circuit has affirmed.

The patents here are all part of the same family — all directed to a seeming business method of providing an “electronic means of increasing user control over subscription entertainment content.” U.S. Patent Nos. 8,989,160; 7,489,671; 7,486,649; and 7,171,194. Although the bulk of the patents were issued pre-Alice (2014), the ‘160 was issued later in 2015. During prosecution, the examiner did reject the claims originally under Section 101 — that was overcome however by amending the specification to limit “computer-readable medium” to only non-transitory storage. Of course, that strict line-drawing does not work for the flexible eligibility analysis applied in court.


What is nice to see here is that despite the plaintiff's effort to make up for lack of quality using quantity (several patents, not just one), 35 U.S.C. ۤ 101 thwarted them all. Unlike, say, what happened at the start of this year with Finjan.

Recent Techrights' Posts

Google, FSFE & Child labor
Reprinted with permission from the Free Software Fellowship
[Video] Trainline Finally Issues a Refund, But It Took 9 Days and Showed How 'Modern' Systems Fail Travelers
They treat people like a bunch of animals or cattle, not like valuable customers
 
Links 13/04/2024: Whistleblowers, OpenAI and Microsoft Leakers
Links for the day
'Our' Technology Inside the Home is Becoming Less Reliable and It Implements the Vision of Orwell's '1984' (Microphones and Cameras Inside Almost Every Room)
Technology controlled by who exactly?
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Friday, April 12, 2024
IRC logs for Friday, April 12, 2024
Links 13/04/2024: Huawei and Loongson PCs, IBM Layoffs
Links for the day
Gemini Links 13/04/2024: Specification Changes and Metaverse Newbie
Links for the day
Links 12/04/2024: Big Brother in the Workplace and Profectus Browser Alpha 0.3
Links for the day
WIPO UDRP D2024-0770 Debian vendetta response
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Links 12/04/2024: Reporters Without Borders Rep Kicked Out of Hong Kong
Links for the day
Gemini Links 12/04/2024: Funny Thing, Manual Scripts, and More
Links for the day
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Thursday, April 11, 2024
IRC logs for Thursday, April 11, 2024
DebConf22 Kosovo segregation of women exposed
Reprinted with permission from disguised.work
Links 11/04/2024: Web Diversity and More Crackdowns in Russia
Links for the day
Gemini Links 11/04/2024: Activity and Motivation in Geminispace, gwit Implementations
Links for the day
First They Came for Iranian Developers...
Red Hat/IBM and 'cancel culture'
[Video] A Debian Project Leader Needs to Also be a Technical Project Leader
We do not vouch for one (or none) horse in this race
Aggressive Efforts (and Threats) for Those Who Speak About What Happened in the Balkans
Acting in this way in an effort to censor people typically results in a second scandal on top of the original scandal
How Kosovo won DebConf21
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
[Video] How the Media Blamed SSH and Linux (for Nearly a Whole Fortnight!) Instead of Microsoft's GitHub and Systemd
Microsoft-connected sites have said a whole bunch of lies
Anzacathon: a hackathon for Anzac day at home
Reprinted with permission from Daniel Pocock
Over at Tux Machines...
GNU/Linux news for the past day
IRC Proceedings: Wednesday, April 10, 2024
IRC logs for Wednesday, April 10, 2024
On Julian Assange, Now 5 Years in Belmarsh Prison: The Good News, the Bad News, and Ugly Noise
Some time this spring (or summer) we'll revisit the Appelbaum case