United States: Federal Circuit Split On Specification's Role In Determining Patent Eligibility

Last Updated: November 25 2016
Article by Leslie Kushner

Leslie Kushner is an Associate in our New York office.

HIGHLIGHTS:

  • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit reversed a district court ruling that four related software patents are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101, by considering the specification to determine that the patents do not claim an abstract idea. Amdocs (Isreal) Limited v. Openet Telecom, Inc. (2015-1180, slip. op. (Fed. Cir. Nov. 1, 2016)).
  • Until the Federal Circuit addresses the §101 patent eligibility analysis en banc, the outcome of an appeal addressing patent eligibility will be panel-dependent.
  • Should the factual statements of the specification, which were relied upon by the Federal Circuit to reverse the judgment on the pleadings, prove to be unfounded on remand, the trial court may potentially be faced with the legal dilemma of finding infringement and invalidity based on different interpretations of the claims.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently reversed a district court ruling that four related software patents are patent ineligible under 35 U.S.C. §101, by considering the specification to determine that the patents do not claim an abstract idea. Amdocs (Isreal) Limited v. Openet Telecom, Inc. (2015-1180, slip. op. (Fed. Cir. Nov. 1, 2016)).

The majority and dissenting opinions highlight different analytic approaches to a §101 analysis of patent eligibility. Specifically, the dissent does not agree that the specification should be considered in an analysis of whether patent claims are directed to an abstract idea. Consideration of the specification in such an analysis has a bearing on the likelihood of finding a patent eligible or ineligible under §101.

Thus, since the Federal Circuit is divided on its approach to determination of §101 patent eligibility, the results of any such case will be panel-dependent. In addition, because the Federal Circuit reversed the grant of judgment on the pleadings and remanded for the trial court to address other grounds of invalidity and infringement, the holding may raise a potential dilemma for the trial court. That is, should the factual statements relied upon to find patent eligibility prove to be unfounded on remand, it is conceivable that the trial court could find that the claims read on the alleged infringing product without the technological improvements set forth in the specification. Were that to occur, the violation of fundamental patent law doctrine – that claims be construed the same way for determination of infringement and validity – would need to be resolved.

Subject Matter Eligibility

Under Section 101 of the Patent Act "[w]hoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor ... ." 35 U.S.C. §101. The U.S. Supreme Court has repeatedly articulated three long-held exceptions to patentable subject matter: laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas. See, e.g., Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., 133 S.Ct. 2107, 2116 (2013); Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 601 (2010). The Supreme Court put forth a two-step process for "distinguishing patents that claim laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas from those that claim patent-eligible applications of those concepts." Alice Corp. Pty Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014); see also Mayo Collaborative Serv. V. Prometheus Labs., Inc. 132 S.Ct. 1289, 1296-97 (2012).

In the first step, the court determines if the claims are directed to a patent-ineligible exception. Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2355. In this first step, the court considers the breadth of the claims and evaluates whether the claims cover a "fundamental ... practice long prevalent in our system ... ." Id. Only if the court finds that the claims are directed to a patent-ineligible exception does it proceed to the second step of determining if the elements of the claim "transform the nature of the claim" into a patent-eligible invention. Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2355. A claim directed to a law of nature, for example, may be patent-eligible if the "claimed process include[s] ... unconventional steps ... that confine[] the claim[] to a particular, useful application of the principle." Mayo 132 S. Ct. at 1300; see also BASCOM Global Internet Servs. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1348 (Fed. Cir. 2016) ("some inventions' basic thrust might more easily be understood as directed to an abstract idea, but under step two of the Alice analysis, it might become clear that the specific improvements in the recited computer technology go beyond 'well-understood, routing, conventional activit[ies]' and render the invention patent-eligible") (quoting Alice, 134 S. Ct. at 2359). On the other hand, a claim remains patent-ineligible if it includes only "purely 'conventional or obvious'" elements. Mayo, 132 S. Ct. at 1299.

The Patents And District Court Ruling

The Amdocs patents in the suit concerned data mediation software used by network service providers to monitor and bill for customer data usage. Each of the patents' written descriptions describes the same system, which includes hardware and software components arranged in a "distributed architecture" that functions to reduce network congestion. Amdocs slip. op. at 3-4. Granting the alleged infringer's motion for judgment on the pleadings, the district court ruled that because the claims were directed to "correlating two network accounting records to enhance the first record," "using a database to compile and report on network usage information," "generat[ing] a single record reflecting multiple services" or "reporting on the collection of network usage information from a plurality of network devices" using ordinary technology, the patents are directed to an abstract idea with no inventive concepts. Amdocs (Israel) LTD. v. Openet Telecom, Inc., 56 F. Supp. 3d 813, 820, 823-825 (E.D. Va. 2014).

Specification Informs The Patent Eligibility Analysis

The majority used the specification to inform their analysis of whether exemplary claims were patent eligible under §101. In a prior appeal, the Federal Circuit construed "enhance" in exemplary claim 1 of the '065 patent (exemplary claims are reproduced below) to mean "to apply a number of field enhancements in a distributed fashion." Amdocs slip op. at 5, 22. The Federal Circuit also approved of the district court's construction of "completing" in exemplary claim 16 of the '510 patent to mean "enhance a record until all required fields have been populated," where "enhance" has the same meaning as in claim 1 of the '065 patent. Id. at 27. The majority opinion reasoned that in a §101 patent eligibility analysis, not only are the claims examined "taking into consideration the approved claim constructions," but the claims are examined "in light of the written description." Id. at 19-20 (citing Enfish v Microsoft, 822 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2016) and In re TLI Commc'ns LLC Patent Litig., 823 F.3d 607 (Fed. Cir. 2016).

The specification explained the "distributed architecture" of the invention was a critical advancement over the prior art that, according to the majority opinion, provided "an unconventional solution (enhancing data in a distributed fashion) to a technological problem ...," even though it utilized generic components. Id. at 22-23, 27-28, 30-31, 32-33.

Referring to exemplary claim 1 of the '797 patent, the majority concluded that "an examination of the claim in light of the written description reveals that many of these components and functionalities are in fact neither generic nor conventional ... ." Amdocs slip op. at 34. Because the claims of the patents in suit require components to operate in an unconventional manner to improve computer function, they include the type of inventive concept required in step two of the Alice/Mayo approach and are, therefore, patent-eligible. Id. at 23.

In contrast, the dissent opined that the decision "contravenes the fundamental principal that the Section 101 inquiry is about whether the claims are directed to patent-eligible invention, not whether the specification is so directed." Amdocs dissenting slip op. at 2 (citing Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp., No. 2015-1599, slip. op. at 20-21 (Fed. Cir. Oct. 17, 2016)). That is, "the inquiry is not whether the specifications disclose a patent-eligible system, but whether the claims are directed to a patent ineligible concept." Id. at 12 (emphasis in original).

The dissent strictly applied the two-step Alice/Mayo analysis to the exemplary claims, which in the first step requires an analysis of whether the claim is "directed to" an abstract idea. Amdocs slip dissenting op. at 2. Then if the second step is necessary in the analysis, it should include an evaluation of whether the claim limits the abstract idea in ways other than "illusory" – limitations that do not narrow the claim – or "contextual" – field-of-use limitations that do not convert an abstract idea to a patentable invention. Id. at 10-11.

Applying the Alice/Mayo two-step analysis, the dissent concluded that because exemplary claim 1 of the '065 patent recites software stored on a physical storage medium without limitations that provide inventive concept, that claim is patent ineligible. Id. at 14. Similarly, exemplary claim 1 of the '797 patent, directed to "the abstract concept of collecting information about network services," recites no limitation that would redirect the claim to patent eligibility. Id. at 25.

According to the dissent, the majority relied on the description of "distributed architecture" in the specification that was not described in these claims. Id. at 2. On the other hand, exemplary claim 16 of the '510 patent and exemplary claim 1 of the '984 patent recites enough of the "distributed architecture" protocol described in the specification to provide inventive concept to those claims. Id. at 18, 21.

Conclusion

Until the Federal Circuit addresses the §101 patent eligibility analysis en banc, the outcome of an appeal addressing patent eligibility will be panel-dependent. In addition, should the factual statements of the specification, which were relied upon by the Federal Circuit to reverse the judgment on the pleadings, prove to be unfounded on remand, the trial court may potentially be faced with the legal dilemma of finding infringement and invalidity based on different interpretations of the claims.

Representative Claims

U.S. Patent No. 7,631,065, Claim 1:

1. A computer program product embodied on a computer readable storage medium for processing network accounting information comprising:

computer code for receiving from a first source a first network accounting record;
computer code for correlating the first network accounting record with accounting information available from a second source; and
computer code for using the accounting information with which the first network accounting record is correlated to enhance the first network accounting record.

U.S. Patent No. 7,412,510, Claim 16:

16. A computer program product stored in a computer readable medium for reporting on a collection of network usage information from a plurality of network devices, comprising:

computer code for collecting network communications usage information in real-time form a plurality of network devices at a plurality of layers;
computer code for filtering and aggregating the network communication usage information;
computer code for completing a plurality of data records from the filtered and aggregated network communications usage information, the plurality of data records corresponding to network usage by a plurality of users;
computer code for submitting queries to the database utilizing predetermined reports for retrieving information on the collection of the network usage information from the network devices; and
computer code for outputting a report based on the queries; wherein resource consumption queries are submitted to the database utilizing the reports for retrieving information on resource consumption in a network; and
wherein a resource consumption report is outputted based on theresource consumption queries.

U.S. Patent No. 6,947,984, Claim 1:

1. A method for reporting on the collection of network usage information from a plurality of network devices, comprising:

(a) collecting networks communications usage information in real-time from a plurality of network devices at a plurality of layers utilizing multiple gatherers each including a plurality of information source modules each interfacing with one of the network devices and capable of communicating using a protocol specific to the network device coupled thereto, the network devices selected from the group consisting of routers, switches, firewalls, authentication servers, web hosts, proxy servers, netflow servers, databases, mail servers, RADIUS servers, and domain name servers, the gatherers being positioned on a segment of the network on which the network devices coupled thereto are positioned for minimizing an impact of the gatherers on the network;

(b) filtering and aggregating the network communications usage information;

(c) completing a plurality of data records from the filtered and aggregated network communications usage information, the plurality of data records corresponding to network usage by a plurality of users;

(d) storing the plurality of data records in a database;

(e) allowing the selection of one of a plurality of reports for reporting purposes;

(f) submitting queries to the database utilizing the selected
reports for retrieving information on the collection of the network usage information from the network devices; and

(g) outputting a report based on the queries.

U.S. Patent No. 6,836,797, Claim 1:

1. A method for generating a single record reflecting multiple services for accounting purposes, comprising:

(a) identifying a plurality of services carried out over a network;

(b) collecting data describing the plurality of services; and

(c) generating a single record including the collected data,
 wherein the single record represents each of the plurality of
services;
wherein the services include at least two services selected
from a group consisting of a hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) session, an electronic mail session, a multimedia streaming session, a voice over Internet Protocol (IP) session, a data communication session, an instant messaging session, a peer-to-peer network application session, a file transfer protocol (FTP) session, and a telnet session;
 wherein the data is collected utilizing an enhancement
procedure defined utilizing a graphical user interface by:
    listing a plurality of available functions to be applied in
real-time prior to end-user reporting;
    allowing a user to choose at least one of a plurality of
fields, and allowing the user to choose at least one of the listed functions to be applied to the chosen field in real-time prior to end-user reporting.

   

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

To print this article, all you need is to be registered on Mondaq.com.

Click to Login as an existing user or Register so you can print this article.

Authors
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
 
In association with
Related Topics
 
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Related Articles
 
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Tools
Print
Font Size:
Translation
Channels
Mondaq on Twitter
 
Register for Access and our Free Biweekly Alert for
This service is completely free. Access 250,000 archived articles from 100+ countries and get a personalised email twice a week covering developments (and yes, our lawyers like to think you’ve read our Disclaimer).
 
Email Address
Company Name
Password
Confirm Password
Position
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Accounting
 Anti-trust
 Commercial
 Compliance
 Consumer
 Criminal
 Employment
 Energy
 Environment
 Family
 Finance
 Government
 Healthcare
 Immigration
 Insolvency
 Insurance
 International
 IP
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Litigation
 Media & IT
 Privacy
 Real Estate
 Strategy
 Tax
 Technology
 Transport
 Wealth Mgt
Regions
Africa
Asia
Asia Pacific
Australasia
Canada
Caribbean
Europe
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
U.K.
United States
Worldwide Updates
Registration (you must scroll down to set your data preferences)

Mondaq Ltd requires you to register and provide information that personally identifies you, including your content preferences, for three primary purposes (full details of Mondaq’s use of your personal data can be found in our Privacy and Cookies Notice):

  • To allow you to personalize the Mondaq websites you are visiting to show content ("Content") relevant to your interests.
  • To enable features such as password reminder, news alerts, email a colleague, and linking from Mondaq (and its affiliate sites) to your website.
  • To produce demographic feedback for our content providers ("Contributors") who contribute Content for free for your use.

Mondaq hopes that our registered users will support us in maintaining our free to view business model by consenting to our use of your personal data as described below.

Mondaq has a "free to view" business model. Our services are paid for by Contributors in exchange for Mondaq providing them with access to information about who accesses their content. Once personal data is transferred to our Contributors they become a data controller of this personal data. They use it to measure the response that their articles are receiving, as a form of market research. They may also use it to provide Mondaq users with information about their products and services.

Details of each Contributor to which your personal data will be transferred is clearly stated within the Content that you access. For full details of how this Contributor will use your personal data, you should review the Contributor’s own Privacy Notice.

Please indicate your preference below:

Yes, I am happy to support Mondaq in maintaining its free to view business model by agreeing to allow Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors whose Content I access
No, I do not want Mondaq to share my personal data with Contributors

Also please let us know whether you are happy to receive communications promoting products and services offered by Mondaq:

Yes, I am happy to received promotional communications from Mondaq
No, please do not send me promotional communications from Mondaq
Terms & Conditions

Mondaq.com (the Website) is owned and managed by Mondaq Ltd (Mondaq). Mondaq grants you a non-exclusive, revocable licence to access the Website and associated services, such as the Mondaq News Alerts (Services), subject to and in consideration of your compliance with the following terms and conditions of use (Terms). Your use of the Website and/or Services constitutes your agreement to the Terms. Mondaq may terminate your use of the Website and Services if you are in breach of these Terms or if Mondaq decides to terminate the licence granted hereunder for any reason whatsoever.

Use of www.mondaq.com

To Use Mondaq.com you must be: eighteen (18) years old or over; legally capable of entering into binding contracts; and not in any way prohibited by the applicable law to enter into these Terms in the jurisdiction which you are currently located.

You may use the Website as an unregistered user, however, you are required to register as a user if you wish to read the full text of the Content or to receive the Services.

You may not modify, publish, transmit, transfer or sell, reproduce, create derivative works from, distribute, perform, link, display, or in any way exploit any of the Content, in whole or in part, except as expressly permitted in these Terms or with the prior written consent of Mondaq. You may not use electronic or other means to extract details or information from the Content. Nor shall you extract information about users or Contributors in order to offer them any services or products.

In your use of the Website and/or Services you shall: comply with all applicable laws, regulations, directives and legislations which apply to your Use of the Website and/or Services in whatever country you are physically located including without limitation any and all consumer law, export control laws and regulations; provide to us true, correct and accurate information and promptly inform us in the event that any information that you have provided to us changes or becomes inaccurate; notify Mondaq immediately of any circumstances where you have reason to believe that any Intellectual Property Rights or any other rights of any third party may have been infringed; co-operate with reasonable security or other checks or requests for information made by Mondaq from time to time; and at all times be fully liable for the breach of any of these Terms by a third party using your login details to access the Website and/or Services

however, you shall not: do anything likely to impair, interfere with or damage or cause harm or distress to any persons, or the network; do anything that will infringe any Intellectual Property Rights or other rights of Mondaq or any third party; or use the Website, Services and/or Content otherwise than in accordance with these Terms; use any trade marks or service marks of Mondaq or the Contributors, or do anything which may be seen to take unfair advantage of the reputation and goodwill of Mondaq or the Contributors, or the Website, Services and/or Content.

Mondaq reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to take any action that it deems necessary and appropriate in the event it considers that there is a breach or threatened breach of the Terms.

Mondaq’s Rights and Obligations

Unless otherwise expressly set out to the contrary, nothing in these Terms shall serve to transfer from Mondaq to you, any Intellectual Property Rights owned by and/or licensed to Mondaq and all rights, title and interest in and to such Intellectual Property Rights will remain exclusively with Mondaq and/or its licensors.

Mondaq shall use its reasonable endeavours to make the Website and Services available to you at all times, but we cannot guarantee an uninterrupted and fault free service.

Mondaq reserves the right to make changes to the services and/or the Website or part thereof, from time to time, and we may add, remove, modify and/or vary any elements of features and functionalities of the Website or the services.

Mondaq also reserves the right from time to time to monitor your Use of the Website and/or services.

Disclaimer

The Content is general information only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice or seek to be the complete and comprehensive statement of the law, nor is it intended to address your specific requirements or provide advice on which reliance should be placed. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers make no representations about the suitability of the information contained in the Content for any purpose. All Content provided "as is" without warranty of any kind. Mondaq and/or its Contributors and other suppliers hereby exclude and disclaim all representations, warranties or guarantees with regard to the Content, including all implied warranties and conditions of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. To the maximum extent permitted by law, Mondaq expressly excludes all representations, warranties, obligations, and liabilities arising out of or in connection with all Content. In no event shall Mondaq and/or its respective suppliers be liable for any special, indirect or consequential damages or any damages whatsoever resulting from loss of use, data or profits, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other tortious action, arising out of or in connection with the use of the Content or performance of Mondaq’s Services.

General

Mondaq may alter or amend these Terms by amending them on the Website. By continuing to Use the Services and/or the Website after such amendment, you will be deemed to have accepted any amendment to these Terms.

These Terms shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of England and Wales and you irrevocably submit to the exclusive jurisdiction of the courts of England and Wales to settle any dispute which may arise out of or in connection with these Terms. If you live outside the United Kingdom, English law shall apply only to the extent that English law shall not deprive you of any legal protection accorded in accordance with the law of the place where you are habitually resident ("Local Law"). In the event English law deprives you of any legal protection which is accorded to you under Local Law, then these terms shall be governed by Local Law and any dispute or claim arising out of or in connection with these Terms shall be subject to the non-exclusive jurisdiction of the courts where you are habitually resident.

You may print and keep a copy of these Terms, which form the entire agreement between you and Mondaq and supersede any other communications or advertising in respect of the Service and/or the Website.

No delay in exercising or non-exercise by you and/or Mondaq of any of its rights under or in connection with these Terms shall operate as a waiver or release of each of your or Mondaq’s right. Rather, any such waiver or release must be specifically granted in writing signed by the party granting it.

If any part of these Terms is held unenforceable, that part shall be enforced to the maximum extent permissible so as to give effect to the intent of the parties, and the Terms shall continue in full force and effect.

Mondaq shall not incur any liability to you on account of any loss or damage resulting from any delay or failure to perform all or any part of these Terms if such delay or failure is caused, in whole or in part, by events, occurrences, or causes beyond the control of Mondaq. Such events, occurrences or causes will include, without limitation, acts of God, strikes, lockouts, server and network failure, riots, acts of war, earthquakes, fire and explosions.

By clicking Register you state you have read and agree to our Terms and Conditions