Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Recommendations for Evolving Patent Eligibility of Hardware
Regardless of whether a patent practitioner's clients favor a stricter or more lenient eligibility regime, patent eligibility decisions continue to evolve. Patent practitioners have been seeking updated guidance since 2014's Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573, U.S. 208 (2014) decision, and we may see some from American Axle & Mfg. v. Neapco Holdings, LLC, 967 F.3d 1285 (Fed. Cir. 2020). We are still waiting for a response to last year's invitation from the Supreme Court to the Solicitor General seeking guidance on granting certiorari in American Axle. Some practitioners have wondered why American Axle should be the subject of such long-awaited guidance. Indeed, practitioners filing an amicus brief in Interactive Wearables, LLC v. Polar Electro Oy, stated their preference for an application surrounding an "intuitive technology" over American Axle's "highly technical subject matter." Interactive Wearables, LLC v. Polar Electro Oy, et al., No. 21-1281, Brief of the Chicago Patent Attorneys as Amici Curiae in Support of Petitioner at 4 (U.S. April 21, 2022). However, it can be argued that the level of technicality is indeed what makes it the right case: We need a line drawn for what practitioners expect to be clearer. Hardware inventions are facing patent eligibility challenges that would have seemed more likely in software inventions. Recent court decisions have shown that what once made a hardware invention eligible may no longer fly.
Practitioners can no longer rely on arguments for their hardware patent applications that worked in the years immediately after Alice. Practitioners must be aware of the evolving eligibility decisions on hardware applications before the realization of an alternate world where a practitioner asks themselves how they can get their hardware application out of art unit 3600, the USPTO epicenter of rejections based on subject matter ineligibility. This article provides recommendations for practitioners to create more robust hardware patent applications that would stand against the developing subjectivity around patent eligibility with hardware patents.
|Older Eligibility Decisions
In 2017, the Federal Circuit decided that a particular arrangement of inertial sensors in Thales Visionix, Inc. v. United States, 122 Fed. Cl. 245 (2015), rev'd and remanded, 850 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2017) lent itself to patent eligibility under Step One of the Alice Test, which looks to whether a patent claim is "directed to" a patent ineligible concept. In an opinion authored by Judge Moore and joined by Judges Wallach and Stoll, the Federal Circuit referenced the "unconventional utilization of inertial sensors," citing to multiple areas of the specification of Thales Visionix's U.S. Patent No. 6,474,159 (the '159 patent). See, Thales Visionix Inc. v. United States, 850 F.3d 1343, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2017). Furthermore, the Federal Circuit saw the claims in Thales Visionix Inc. to be "nearly indistinguishable" from the claims in Diamond v. Diehr, 450 U.S. 175 (1981) which were patent eligible for being directed to a rubber curing process rather than a law of nature. See, Thales Visionix, 850 F.3d at 1348.
This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only
ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCESS TO THE SINGLE SOURCE OF OBJECTIVE LEGAL ANALYSIS, PRACTICAL INSIGHTS, AND NEWS IN ENTERTAINMENT LAW.
- Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
- Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
- Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts
Already a have an account? Sign In Now Log In Now
For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473
How Secure Is the AI System Your Law Firm Is Using?
In a profession where confidentiality is paramount, failing to address AI security concerns could have disastrous consequences. It is vital that law firms and those in related industries ask the right questions about AI security to protect their clients and their reputation.
COVID-19 and Lease Negotiations: Early Termination Provisions
During the COVID-19 pandemic, some tenants were able to negotiate termination agreements with their landlords. But even though a landlord may agree to terminate a lease to regain control of a defaulting tenant's space without costly and lengthy litigation, typically a defaulting tenant that otherwise has no contractual right to terminate its lease will be in a much weaker bargaining position with respect to the conditions for termination.
Pleading Importation: ITC Decisions Highlight Need for Adequate Evidentiary Support
The International Trade Commission is empowered to block the importation into the United States of products that infringe U.S. intellectual property rights, In the past, the ITC generally instituted investigations without questioning the importation allegations in the complaint, however in several recent cases, the ITC declined to institute an investigation as to certain proposed respondents due to inadequate pleading of importation.
The Power of Your Inner Circle: Turning Friends and Social Contacts Into Business Allies
Practical strategies to explore doing business with friends and social contacts in a way that respects relationships and maximizes opportunities.
Authentic Communications Today Increase Success for Value-Driven Clients
As the relationship between in-house and outside counsel continues to evolve, lawyers must continue to foster a client-first mindset, offer business-focused solutions, and embrace technology that helps deliver work faster and more efficiently.