The U.S. Supreme Court declined to hear several intellectual property appeals, including the case of Impact Engine which sought clarity on Section 101's two-step patent eligibility test. The Federal Circuit had previously upheld the Southern District of California's ruling that invalidated Impact Engine's patent claims, determining they pertained to an abstract idea rather than a patentable invention. Dissent came from Judge Jimmie Reyna, who argued that the court did not properly analyze the limitations of one particular claim. This lack of Supreme Court intervention leaves uncertainty regarding patent eligibility criteria.
In early February, Internet ad platform developer Impact Engine filed its petition for writ to appeal the Federal Circuit's ruling from last July affirming the invalidation of Impact Engine's patent claims to web-based advertisement systems under 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Reviewing de novo the Southern District of California's Section 101 rulings at the motion to dismiss and summary judgment stages, the CAFC panel majority found that Impact Engine's patent claims were directed to the abstract idea of processing user-provided information to create user-tailored outputs.
Collection
[
|
...
]