"The CAFC stated that '[a]t best, the AR content objects merely limit the field of use of the abstract idea to a particular existing technological environment,' which does not render the claims any less abstract."
"The district court held that the claims were directed to the abstract idea of 'providing information based on a location on a map,' finding no inventive concept in the claims."
"NantWorks argued that the district court oversimplified the relevant claims, but the CAFC explained that the claims did not demonstrate an inventive concept that made them eligible."
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court's ruling that several claims of an augmented reality patent were abstract ideas and invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. NantWorks LLC sued Niantic, Inc. for patent infringement related to AR games. The district court found the claims directed to abstract ideas of providing and receiving location-based information, lacking any inventive concept. NantWorks' appeal was rejected by the CAFC, which agreed that the claims were overly simplified and did not demonstrate a unique technological advancement.
Read at IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Intellectual Property Law
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]