The case came to the Federal Circuit twice, and the two panels did not even agree on what would be a fair characterization of what idea the claims were directed to, much less how to determine whether such an idea was an unpatentable abstract idea.
As the district court explained, none of the claims at issue specifies any particular technique to carry out the compression of data-the particular rules for producing a smaller set of data out of a larger starting set.
[
add
]
[
|
|
...
]