Mayo

Data Processing Claims Held Patent-Ineligible: Personal Web Technologies LLC v. Google LLC

In a precedential decision, the Federal Circuit has held patent-ineligible, under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the Alice/Mayo test, claims of three patents directed to “data-processing systems that assign each data item a substantially… Read More

Lessons of Yu v. Apple: The Law of § 101 Patent-Eligibility Is Chaos

Here is a case that both demonstrates the dysfunction of U.S. patent law with respect to eligible subject matter under  35 U.S.C. § 101, and offers lessons for practitioners wishing to buttress the patent-eligibility of their cl… Read More

Internet Data Backup Not Patent-Eligible under § 101: WhitServe LLC v. DropBox, Inc.

Patent claims directed to backing up data to a client’s computers where the data has been outsourced for processing via the Internet failed the patent-eligibility test under the Alice/Mayo test and 35 U.S.C. § 101. WhitServe L… Read More

Wireless Surveillance System with Generic Components is Patent-Ineligible: Sensormatic Elect., LLC, v. Wize Labs, Inc.

In granting a motion to dismiss based on lack of patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the Alice/Mayo test, a court held that patent claims for multiple patents directed to “wireless surveillance systems fo… Read More

Patent Claims for “Two-step Pick and Place” fail § 101 at Rule 12 stage.

Patent claims directed to a two-step “pick and place” operation for attaching electronic parts to a circuit body (a “die attach” method) were held ineligible on a Rule 12(c) motion for judgment on the pleadings under 35 U.… Read More