This morning, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion in a patent case addressing patent eligibility and a precedential opinion in a veterans case involving a denial of duplicative educational benefits. Additionally, the court issued a nonprecedential opinion in a patent case. Here are the introductions to the opinions.
In re Board of Trustees of Leland Stanford Junior University (Precedential)
The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University appeals the final rejection of patent claims in its patent application. The patent examiner reviewing the application rejected the claims on the grounds that they involve patent ineligible subject matter. On review, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board affirmed the examiner’s final rejection of the claims. As discussed below, the rejected claims are drawn to abstract mathematical calculations and statistical modeling, and similar subject matter that is not patent eligible. Accordingly, we affirm the decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.
Vollono v. McDonough (Precedential)
Robert Vollono appeals a decision by the United States Court of Appeals for Veterans Claims affirming a decision by the Board of Veterans’ Appeals which denied the extension of certain educational benefits to Mr. Vollono. Because we agree with the Veterans Court that Mr. Vollono is not entitled to duplicative educational benefits, we affirm.
RideApp, Inc. v. Lyft, Inc. (Nonprecedential)
RideApp Inc. (RideApp) appeals the district court’s claim construction order finding claims 2, 3, and 6 of U.S. Patent No. 6,697,730 (’730 patent) indefinite under 35 U.S.C. § 112, ¶ 2 for failing to disclose adequate structure corresponding to various computer-implemented means-plus-function claim terms. For the following reasons, we affirm.