Search Results for: Alice v. CLS Bank
Commissioner of Patents: Drew Hirshfeld
Oregon Supreme Court Permits Patent Firm to Claim Privilege Over Communications with Internal Counsel
Recent Scholarship: Investing in America’s Future by David Kappos
FM v. Google: Means-plus-Function Indefiniteness and O2 Micro Challenges
Business Method Patents: Technological Change, Not Judicial Activism
Suing for Infringement Done “For the United States”
Bilski Briefs: Supporting the Government (In Name)
Federal Circuit Applies Phillips to Limit Gift Card Claim Construction
In re Ferguson (Answers to Frequently Asked Questions FAQ)
CLS Bank is out
Impact of Mayo and Alice — Largely Confined to Particular Art Units
Degrees of Disagreement: Google Petitions En Banc on Smart Thermostat Patent Damages
by Dennis Crouch
Google recently petitioned for en banc review a Federal Circuit split decision in EcoFactor v. Google. The case focuses on when a damages expert testimony satisfies Daubert. The original opinion also highlights an interesting debate regarding the appeal of pre-trial eligibility rulings.
Federal Circuit Affirms Invalidity of Genus Claims to Stevia Production Method Lacking Written Description and Narrower Claims as Combining Natural Phenomena with an Abstract Idea
by Dennis Crouch
In PureCircle USA Inc. v. SweeGen, Inc., No. 22-1946 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 2, 2024) (non-precedential) [PureCircle Decision], the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court summary judgment siding against the patentee, PureCircle. The court concluded that the stevia production method claims were all invalid, either for: (1) lack of written description for the genus claim or (2) lack of eligibility because the claims are directed to a natural phenomenon combined with an abstract idea. Judge Dyk authored the opinion of the court that was joined by Judges Schall and Stark affirming the ruling of C.D.Cal Judge James Selna.
The written description portion of the opinion parallels the Supreme Court's 2023 Amgen decision that focused on the sibling doctrine of enablement. Although non-precedential, the eligibility portion appears important because of the way it combines prohibited eligibility categories and rules that method claims requiring a particular purity level are themselves an abstract idea absent requirement of specific steps on how that purity level is achieved.