CPIP Scholars File Amicus Brief Urging Supreme Court to Fix Section 101

On December 4, 2017, CPIP Founder Adam Mossoff and CPIP John F. Witherspoon Legal Fellow David Lund filed an amicus brief urging the Supreme Court to grant certiorari in RecogniCorp. v. Nintendo. The amicus brief was joined by several law professors, including Richard Epstein and Michael Risch, as well as CPIP Senior Scholars Chris Holman, … Continue reading “CPIP Scholars File Amicus Brief Urging Supreme Court to Fix Section 101”

Federal Circuit Improperly Extends Abstract Idea Exception to Industrial Machines

An oil well drilling rig is not an abstract idea. A method of operating an oil well drilling rig is also not an abstract idea. This proposition should be clear to all, but in TDE Petroleum Data Solutions v AKM Enterprise, the Federal Circuit held that a method of operating an oil well drilling rig … Continue reading “Federal Circuit Improperly Extends Abstract Idea Exception to Industrial Machines”

Federal Circuit Again Finds Computer-Implemented Invention Patent Eligible

In Tuesday’s McRO v. Bandai decision, the Federal Circuit has once again reversed a district court’s determination that a computer-implemented invention (aka “software patent”) was not patent eligible under Section 101 of the Patent Act. This continues the Federal Circuit’s recent trend of clarifying the Supreme Court’s two-step patent-eligibility test under Mayo and Alice. The … Continue reading “Federal Circuit Again Finds Computer-Implemented Invention Patent Eligible”

CPIP Scholars File Amicus Brief in Trading Technologies v. CQG

Earlier this month, CPIP Senior Scholar Adam Mossoff penned an amicus brief in Trading Technologies v. CQG, currently on appeal to the Federal Circuit. The brief was joined by nine other IP scholars, including CPIP Senior Scholars Mark Schultz and Kristen Osenga. The amici argue that Trading Technologies’ graphical user interface (GUI) constitutes patentable subject … Continue reading “CPIP Scholars File Amicus Brief in Trading Technologies v. CQG”

Overview of Comments on the USPTO's July 2015 Update to the Interim Examination Guidance

The following guest post from Robert R. Sachs, Partner at Fenwick & West LLP, first appeared on the Bilski Blog, and it is reposted here with permission. By Robert R. Sachs In late July, the USPTO issued its July 2015 Update to the 2014 Interim Section 101 Patent Eligibility Guidance (IEG). The July 2015 Update … Continue reading “Overview of Comments on the USPTO's July 2015 Update to the Interim Examination Guidance”

Federal Circuit Should Reconsider Ariosa v. Sequenom: The Panel Decision Threatens Modern Innovation

Here’s a brief excerpt of a post by Devlin Hartline that was published on IPWatchdog. In an amicus brief co-authored by Kevin Noonan of McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP and Professor Adam Mossoff of George Mason University School of Law, twenty-three law professors urge the Federal Circuit to take a second look at the … Continue reading “Federal Circuit Should Reconsider Ariosa v. Sequenom: The Panel Decision Threatens Modern Innovation”

The One Year Anniversary: The Aftermath of #AliceStorm

The following post, by Robert R. Sachs, first appeared on the Bilski Blog, and it is reposted here with permission. It’s been one year since the Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. On its face the opinion was relatively conservative, cautioning courts to “tread carefully” before invalidating patents, and emphasizing that the … Continue reading “The One Year Anniversary: The Aftermath of #AliceStorm”

Federal Circuit Threatens Innovation: Dissecting the Ariosa v. Sequenom Opinion

By Patent Publius Earlier this month, the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in Ariosa v. Sequenom, a closely-watched biotechnology case with significant repercussions for patent-eligibility analysis generally. Unfortunately, the Federal Circuit misapplies the Supreme Court’s analytical framework from Mayo v. Prometheus, striking down Sequenom’s important innovation for the prenatal diagnosis of fetal abnormalities. The shame … Continue reading “Federal Circuit Threatens Innovation: Dissecting the Ariosa v. Sequenom Opinion”