“Whether the specific requirements recited in the language of a claim can be disregarded in determining the ‘focus’ of the claim under step one of the Alice/Mayo test for patent-eligibility.”
“Whether a claimed combination of non-abstract (e.g., structural) limitations that has not been shown to exist in the prior art can be found to be ‘generic’ and ‘conventional.’”
“Whether a court can make adverse findings of fact against the non-moving party at the pleadings stage that are inconsistent with the patent specification, the file history, and/or plausible allegations in the complaint.”
“Whether a claim that presents no danger of preempting an ‘abstract idea,’ either generally or in a particular field of use or technological environment, can be found ineligible for patent protection under 35 U.S.C. § 101.”
