Joseph Sohm / Shutterstock.com
Despite some predictions that the impact of Alice v CLS Bank is waning, two recent decisions by a US district court show that this is probably not the case, at least in Delaware. Ferlillia Roberson of DLA Piper reports.
Uncertainty over software patents’ eligibility under 35 USC §101 is alive and well—nearly two years after the Alice v CLS Bank decision. Notwithstanding the framework set forth in Alice, district courts continue to grapple with patent eligibility for software patents in view of the US Supreme Court’s ruling.
However, Alice is often treated as an early invalidity tool with quick application. This is particularly true as district courts appear to be more and more receptive to early §101 challenges, particularly under rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure (FRCP).
On February 5, 2016 in Kaavo v Cognizant Tech Solutions Corp, the US District Court for the District of Delaware found patent claims directed to managing a cloud computing environment invalid for reciting patent-ineligible abstract subject matter.
To continue reading, you need a subscription to WIPR. Start a subscription to WIPR for £455.
In-house feature articles, the archive and expert comment require a paid subscription. Subscribe now.
Want to give it a try? We are offering a two week free trial to the WIPR website – register and select “Free Trial” to begin access to the full WIPR archive and read the latest news, features and expert comment. Begin your free trial here.
Is your 2 week free trial about to end? Upgrade to a 12 month subscription for £455 now.
If you have already subscribed please login.
If you have any technical issues please email James Lynn on email@example.com.
Ferlillia Roberson, DLA Piper, Alice, US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, patent protection, §101, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure,