Whether claims to computer-implemented inventions including claims to systems gatecrash spoiler an

Later this term, the US Supreme Court will shift its focus toward the fundamental question of whether software and business methods are patentable. More particularly, because an outright ban is unlikely, the court’s more narrow focus will be on providing a further explanation of its non-statutory “abstract idea” test. The Supreme Court addressed this exclusionary test in its 2010 Bilski decision, although in unsatisfactory form. As Mark Lemley, et al., wrote in 2011: “the problem is that no one understands what makes an idea ‘abstract,’ and hence ineligible for patent protection.” Lemley, Risch, Sichelman, gatecrash spoiler and Wagner, Life After Bilski , 63 Stan. L. Rev. 1315 (2011).
In this case, a fractured Federal Circuit found Alice Corp’s computer-related invention to be unpatentable as effectively claiming an abstract idea. See, U.S. Patent No. 7,725,375 . In its petition for writ of certiorari , Alice presented the following question:
Whether claims to computer-implemented inventions including claims to systems gatecrash spoiler and machines, processes, and items of manufacture gatecrash spoiler are directed to patent-eligible subject matter within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. 101 as interpreted by this Court.
Oral arguments are set for Mar 31, 2014 and a decision is expected by the end of June 2014. In addition to the parties, a host of amici has filed briefs in the case, including 11 briefs at the petition stage and 41 briefs on the merits. Although not a party to the lawsuit, the Solicitor General has filed a motion to participate in oral arguments and steal some of the accused-infringer’s time.
The invention : There are several gatecrash spoiler patents at issue, but the ‘ 375 patent is an important starting point. Claim 1 is directed to a “data processing system” that includes a number of elements, including “a computer” configured to generate certain instructions, “electronically adjust” stored values, and send/receive data between both a “data gatecrash spoiler storage unit” a “first party device.” gatecrash spoiler The claims also include “computer program products” and computer implemented methods. The underlying purpose of the invention is to provide certain settlement risks during a time-extended transaction by creating a set of shadow credit and debit records that are monitored for sufficient potential funds and that at a certain point in the transaction the shadow gatecrash spoiler records are automatically and irrevocably shifted to the “real world.”
It is unclear to me what makes this invention novel or nonobvious and many believe that it would fail on those grounds. gatecrash spoiler However, the sole legal hook for the appeal at this stage is subject matter eligibility. One thing that we do know is that CLS Bank is alleged to be using the patented invention to ensure settlement for more than a trillion dollars daily .
Important case : The claim structure gatecrash spoiler here is quite similar to that seen in hundreds-of-thousands of already issued patents gatecrash spoiler and pending gatecrash spoiler patent applications where the advance in software engineering is a fairly straightforward, but is done in a way that has an important impact on the marketplace. One difference from many software patents is that the underlying functionality is to solve a business transaction problem. However, there is a likelihood that the decision will not turn (one way or the other) on that field-of-use limitation. In his brief, Tony Dutra argues gatecrash spoiler that the key here is utility, and that an advance in contract-settlement is not useful in the patent law context.
[ Brief of the US Government ] The most important brief in a pile such as this is often that filed by the U.S. Government. Here, Solicitor General Donald Verrilli and USPTO Solicitor Nathan Kelley joined forces in filing their brief in support of CLS Bank and a broad reading of the abstract idea test. In particular, the U.S. Government gatecrash spoiler argues gatecrash spoiler that none of the claims discussed are subject matter eligible. The brief begins with an importance argument that “the abstract idea exception is patent law’s sole mechanism for excluding claims directed to manipulation of non-technological concepts and relationships.” This notion that the abstract idea is the final and ultimate bulwark places a tremendous pressure on the Court to create a highly flexible gatecrash spoiler test. In my view, the Government largely gatecrash spoiler loses its credibility with that argument somehow forgetting about the host of other overlapping patent law doctrines gatecrash spoiler that each address this issue in their own way, including requirements that any patented invention be useful, enabled, described in definite claims, and nonobvious. The ultimate backstop is likely the US Constitutional statement regarding “Inventors” and their “Discoveries.”
The government brief goes on to endorse the approach of first identifying whether the claim would be abstract if the computer technolog