eligibility

Claims Survive on Unresolved Question of Fact

by Peter Keros on April 29th, 2019
The Central District of California recently denied a motion to dismiss on patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because a question of fact remained unresolved. In MoviePass, Inc. v. Sinemia, Inc., No. CV 2:18-1517 (C.D. Cal. A… Read More

Another Delayed Patent Eligibility Decision

by Peter Keros on March 14th, 2019
Once again, a district court in California urged parties to improve their pleadings before deciding patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In Kajeet v. Qustodio, CV18-01519 JAK (Feb. 28, 2019), the Central District of Californ… Read More

District Courts Avoid Determining Patent Eligibility

by Peter Keros on March 4th, 2019
How much evidence and claim construction does a court need to make a determination on eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101? According to district courts in California, it depends? In SkyHawke Techs. v. DECA Int’l, CV 18-1234-GW(PL… Read More

User Interface Features Not Patent-Eligible

by Mike McCandlish on November 26th, 2018
Finding a lack of technical innovation, a court held claims for three features for a user-vehicle interface to be directed to patent-ineligible abstract ideas under the Mayo/Alice test and 35 U.S.C. § 101. Thunder Power New Ener… Read More

Subscribe

Categories

1 2 Last »