Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today’s report highlights:
- a blog post about a recent Federal Circuit decision concerning patent eligibility and how it allegedly distinguishes between collection of information and use of information;
- an article about another Federal Circuit decision concerning patent eligibility concluding that “two IBM patents directed to technology that allows users to select and view results on a map were directed to ineligible subject matter”; and
- another article about the Federal Circuit “affirm[ing] a lower court decision to dismiss [a] . . . lawsuit seeking damages” for revocation of a payout from a “government fund for victims of state-sponsored terrorism.”
Dennis Crouch wrote a blog post for PatentlyO about the Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Weisner v. Google, LLC. In that case, explained Crouch, the court found that “Weisner’s claims directed toward collecting information are abstract ideas” whereas “those directed toward using the information are patent eligible.” Crouch reported how the Federal Circuit found the claims eligible “because they implement ‘a specific solution to a problem rooted in computer technology.’”
Eileen McDermott wrote an article for IPWatchdog about another recent Federal Circuit decision “finding that two IBM patents directed to technology that allows users to select and view results on a map were directed to ineligible subject matter.” According to McDermott, the opinion focused on “Alice step one.”
Melissa Nann Burke authored an article for the Detroit News about a Federal Circuit decision affirming “a lower court decision to dismiss [a] lawsuit seeking damages” for revocation of a payout from a “government fund for victims of state-sponsored terrorism.” Nann Burke reported how the Federal Circuit agreed that the lower court “lacks jurisdiction to review decisions by the fund’s special master.”