43 Cited authorities

Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International
573 U.S. 208 (2014) Cited 1,374 times 508 Legal Analyses
Holding ineligible patent claims directed to the concept of "intermediated settlement," i.e., the use of a third party to mitigate the risk that only one party to an agreed-upon financial exchange will satisfy its obligation
Nautilus, Inc. v. Biosig Instruments, Inc.
572 U.S. 898 (2014) Cited 1,354 times 92 Legal Analyses
Holding that claims are not indefinite if, "viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, [they] inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty"
Phillips v. AWH Corp.
415 F.3d 1303 (Fed. Cir. 2005) Cited 5,730 times 164 Legal Analyses
Holding that "because extrinsic evidence can help educate the court regarding the field of the invention and can help the court determine what a person of ordinary skill in the art would understand claim terms to mean, it is permissible for the district court in its sound discretion to admit and use such evidence"
Festo Corp. v. Shoketsu Kinzoku Kogyokabushiki Co.
535 U.S. 722 (2002) Cited 813 times 37 Legal Analyses
Holding that "[t]he scope of a patent is not limited to its literal terms but instead embraces all equivalents to the claims described," because "[t]he language in the patent claims may not capture every nuance of the invention or describe with complete precision the range of its novelty."
Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp.
822 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2016) Cited 704 times 118 Legal Analyses
Holding that claims to self-referential tables that allowed for more efficient launching and adaptation of databases were not directed to an abstract idea
Williamson v. Citrix Online, LLC
792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015) Cited 614 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that a means-plus-function term is indefinite "if a person of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to recognize the structure in the specification and associate it with the corresponding function in the claim"
Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A.
830 F.3d 1350 (Fed. Cir. 2016) Cited 516 times 39 Legal Analyses
Holding that claims directed to "a process of gathering and analyzing information of a specified content, then displaying the results, and not any particular assertedly inventive technology for performing those functions" are directed to an abstract idea
Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Eli Lilly & Co.
598 F.3d 1336 (Fed. Cir. 2010) Cited 587 times 76 Legal Analyses
Holding that our written description requirement requires that a specification “reasonably convey to those skilled in the art” that the inventor “actually invented” and “had possession of the claimed subject matter as of the filing date [of the invention]”
Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC
772 F.3d 709 (Fed. Cir. 2014) Cited 492 times 47 Legal Analyses
Holding that displaying an advertisement in exchange for access to copyrighted material is an abstract idea
TLI Communications LLC v. AV Automotive, L.L.C.
823 F.3d 607 (Fed. Cir. 2016) Cited 401 times 23 Legal Analyses
Holding that claims directed to a method for recording digital images on a telephone were not directed to an improvement to computer functionality because "they are directed to the use of conventional or generic technology in a nascent but well-known environment" without "describ[ing] a new telephone, a new server, or a new physical combination of the two" or "any technical details for the tangible components"
Rule 56 - Summary Judgment
Fed. R. Civ. P. 56 Cited 329,940 times 158 Legal Analyses
Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit
Section 112 - Specification
35 U.S.C. § 112 Cited 7,288 times 1030 Legal Analyses
Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it
Section 101 - Inventions patentable
35 U.S.C. § 101 Cited 3,418 times 2200 Legal Analyses
Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."

Konami Gaming Inc. v. High 5 Games, Llc

43 Cited authorities

Holding ineligible patent claims directed to the concept of "intermediated settlement," i.e., the use of a third party to mitigate the risk that only one party to an agreed-upon financial exchange will satisfy its obligation

Holding that claims are not indefinite if, "viewed in light of the specification and prosecution history, [they] inform those skilled in the art about the scope of the invention with reasonable certainty"

Holding that "[t]he scope of a patent is not limited to its literal terms but instead embraces all equivalents to the claims described," because "[t]he language in the patent claims may not capture every nuance of the invention or describe with complete precision the range of its novelty."

Holding that claims to self-referential tables that allowed for more efficient launching and adaptation of databases were not directed to an abstract idea

Holding that a means-plus-function term is indefinite "if a person of ordinary skill in the art would be unable to recognize the structure in the specification and associate it with the corresponding function in the claim"

Holding that claims directed to "a process of gathering and analyzing information of a specified content, then displaying the results, and not any particular assertedly inventive technology for performing those functions" are directed to an abstract idea

Holding that our written description requirement requires that a specification “reasonably convey to those skilled in the art” that the inventor “actually invented” and “had possession of the claimed subject matter as of the filing date [of the invention]”

Holding that displaying an advertisement in exchange for access to copyrighted material is an abstract idea

Holding a party may move for summary judgment on any part of any claim or defense in the lawsuit

Requiring patent applications to include a "specification" that provides, among other information, a written description of the invention and of the manner and process of making and using it

Defining patentable subject matter as "any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof."