"In Technology in Ariscale, LLC v. Razer USA Ltd., No. 2024-1657 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 6, 2026), the Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 8,139,652 are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for claiming patent-ineligible subject matter. The nonprecedential decision, authored by Judge Cunningham, illustrates continuing difficulty patentees face when attempting to frame mathematical signal processing operations as concrete technological improvements."
"The case also demonstrates how a patent's own specification can undermine eligibility arguments in situations where the disclosed benefits do not map directly to the actual claim language."
The Federal Circuit affirmed the district court's judgment that claims 1 and 14 of U.S. Patent No. 8,139,652 are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as claiming patent-ineligible subject matter. The decision was nonprecedential and authored by Judge Cunningham. The court held that the claims recited mathematical signal processing operations that are abstract and cannot be characterized as a concrete technological improvement. The ruling underscores the difficulty of translating mathematical or algorithmic signal-processing steps into patent-eligible technological advances. The court also relied on the patent specification, finding the disclosed benefits did not map directly onto the claim language and thereby weakened eligibility arguments.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]