Software inventions are patentable depending on how you claim it

Posted On :October 3rd, 2013 By James Yang

Software inventions are patentable depending on how you claim it The eligibility of patent protection for software patents is the hot topic in patent law.  For now, the attack on patents hasn’t spilled over into other technologies (e.g., mechanical arts may be abstract).  For patent attorneys, the big question is not whether software inventions are […]

Software patent invalid without meaningful limitations

Posted On :July 24th, 2013 By James Yang

For the past few years, hot patent topics have revolved around the issue of patent eligible subject matter, especially for software patent.  The Supreme Court has handed down a number of opinions attempting to give broad based guidance to the lower courts and the USPTO.  The lower courts and the USPTO have been left to […]

Are software patents still eligible for patent protection?

Posted On :July 3rd, 2013 By James Yang

Ultramercial v Hulu addressed whether software inventions are eligible for grant as a software patent.    In Ultramercial, the patent claims were directed to a method of utilizing advertising as an exchange or currency.  A consumer would view a copyrighted product for free in exchange for viewing an advertisement.  For example, Hulu.com allows a subscriber to […]

Court still divided on software patents

Posted On :May 14th, 2013 By James Yang

CLS Bank v Alice (en banc Fed Cir. 2013).  This case was supposed to provide greater certainty as to what is eligible and what is not eligible for software patents.  Start ups which are the engine of the U.S. economy typically does not have money to spend on intellectual property rights that are speculative and […]

Apparatus may be abstract idea in determining patent eligibility

Posted On :October 29th, 2012 By James Yang

Basics on Patent Eligible Subject Matter Section 101 of the Patent Act defines patentable subject matter, stating that whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefore. These are broad categories and encompass most if not all […]

Different structure and function required for patent eligibility

Posted On :October 2nd, 2012 By James Yang

Introduction The AMP v. Myriad opinion discusses eligibility of patent protection for genes. Although the opinion is directed to eligibility of patent protection for genes, this opinion is also applicable in understanding how the Federal Circuit will apply Prometheus. This opinion was decided by a fractured three member panel. Although a majority was formed as […]

Eligibility for patent protection (Patentable subject matter)

Posted On :September 12th, 2012 By James Yang

Conflict Recently, the Federal Circuit published an opinion (CLS Bank v. Alice) which appears to conflict with an opinion (Mayo v. Prometheus) by the United States Supreme Court published a few months ago. Inventive concept in Mayo In Mayo v. Prometheus, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that eligibility for patent protection is determined by […]

Inventions eligible for patent protection

Posted On :May 8th, 2012 By James Yang

Mayo v. Prometheus is a seminal case which defines the ideas or invention eligible for patent protection.  For a few years now, the patent bar has been debating the scope of inventions that might be eligible for patent protection.  The Bilski case decided a few years ago pushed the realm of patent-eligible subject matter into […]

What types of inventions are eligible for patent protection?

Posted On :April 24th, 2009 By James Yang

There are four general categories of inventions that are eligible for patent protection. Specifically, they are processes, machines, manufactures and compositions of matter or their improvements. The following case, In re Ferguson, 2007-1232 (Fed. Cir. 2009) involves the issue of whether an invention to a new process is eligible for patent protection. The case makes […]

No Patent Protection For Programmed Computer Method

Posted On :December 16th, 2008 By James Yang

In Ex Parte Halligan, the BPAI held that a method using a programmed computer does not transform a method that is ineligible for patent protection patent eligible. The computer limitation is a field of use limitation and does not add any meaningful limitation to the claims.