Category Archives: Alice

Exergen Corp. v. Kaz USA, Inc. – A Crack in the Patent Eligibility of Diagnostic Claims?

In Exergen Corp. v. Kaz USA, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-2315, 2016-2341 (Fed. Cir., March 8, 2018) (Non-precedential). A panel of Moore, Bryson and Hughes (Hughes dissenting), upheld a district court decision, following trial, that claims to a method of measuring … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Claim Construction, Section 101 | Leave a comment

The Twelve §101 Precedential Decisions of 2017

This is a guest post from the Chisum Patent Academy. In 2017, Federal Circuit panels regularly addressed attacks on software patent claims as ineligible under the Alice “abstract idea” exception. The 2017 pattern, with 8 of 10 decisions finding software … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Federal Court | Leave a comment

Ex Parte Patterson: Assay Based on Two “Natural Phenomena” Does Not Equal One “Inventive Concept”

According to the “Mayo/Alice” rule, if a claim is directed to a “natural phenomena” such as the relationship between the a drug’s metabolite concentration following administration of an immunosuppressive drug and the therapeutic window of efficacy of the drug, the claim … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Appeals, Obviousness, Section 101 | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

Sixteen Critical 2016-2017 Patentability & Validity Developments

This is a guest post from Donald Chisum and Janice Mueller of the Chisum Patent Academy. Below are highlights of the Critical  Patentability & Validity Developments of 2016-2017.   The Federal Circuit’s January 2017 decision in Sonix Tech. Co. v. Publications Int’l, … Continue reading

Posted in 102 Patentability, Alice, Appeals, Assignment/Ownership, Claim Interpretation, Federal Court, Infringement, Post-Grant Issues, USPTO Practice and Policy | Leave a comment