Audio Evolution Diagnostics, Inc. (AED) has petitioned the U.S. Supreme Court to review the patent eligibility statute 35 U.S.C. § 101, claiming the Federal Circuit's decisions on this matter are chaotic. AED highlights concerns over the inconsistent application of the Alice/Mayo framework, where differing opinions among judges have led to arbitrary outcomes. Furthermore, AED critiques the Federal Circuit’s routine use of summary affirmances under Rule 36, arguing this practice undermines the court's role in providing clear interpretations of patent law.
Audio Evolution Diagnostics, Inc. (AED) challenges the Federal Circuit's ruling invalidating its patents, claiming that the 35 U.S.C. § 101 doctrine is in chaos and needs SCOTUS's review.
AED argues that over a decade since the Alice decision, there has been division among decision-makers on applying the § 101 framework, leading to arbitrary outcomes.
The Federal Circuit's overreliance on Rule 36 summary affirmances prevents adequate judicial review and clarity in interpreting patent eligibility under § 101.
AED emphasizes that the blending of § 101 subject matter eligibility with other patentability requirements complicates legal questions and results in inconsistent rulings.
Collection
[
|
...
]