Mr.Mikla / Shutterstock.com
The Federal Circuit’s split ruling in a precedential phone camera patent suit could further obfuscate the Mayo/Alice process, say Michael Comeau and Melissa Chapman of Fishman Stewart.
In Yu et al v Apple et al, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a lower court’s dismissal of a patent infringement lawsuit in favour of Apple and Samsung.
The suit alleged that multi-camera features of Apple and Samsung phones infringed US patent number 6,611,289, but the majority applied the two-step test from Mayo/Alice and agreed with the lower court that claim 1 is ineligible under section 101 because it recites an “abstract idea” without an “inventive concept”.
Claim 1 of the ‘289 patent recites:
The rest of this article is locked for subscribers only. Please login to continue reading.
If you don't have a login, you will need to purchase a subscription to gain access to this article, including all our online content. Please use this link and follow the steps.
For multi-user price options, or to check if your company has an existing subscription to us that we can add you to for FREE, please email Atif Choudhury at firstname.lastname@example.org
Federal Circuit, Apple, Samsung, camera, patent infringement, Mayo/Alice, inventive concept, Newman, section 101, USPTO, Supreme Court