United States: Federal Circuit Cases Clarify What Makes A Valid Software Patent

Last Updated: June 27 2017
Article by Richard Gilly

Several recent decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit have untangled crucial uncertainties plaguing software patent applicants following the outcome of Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International , 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014). Namely, the Federal Circuit's rulings have addressed the validity of claims under by 35 U.S.C. Section 101, which covers subject matter eligibility, and 35 U.S.C. Section 112(f), which covers "means-plus-function" limitations.

Section 101: The Abstract Idea Test

In its Alice decision, the Supreme Court effectively subjected scores of software-related patents to increased risk of invalidation by enunciating a two-part test, originally put forward during Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories , 132 S. Ct. 1289, 1293 (2012), to determine whether a claim was nothing beyond an "abstract idea" and therefore ineligible for patenting. Under the two-part test of Alice/Mayo, a court (or patent examiner) first determines whether a claim is "directed to" an abstract idea. If this threshold determination is met, the claim must be shown to encompass an element or combination of elements that constitute something "significantly more" than the ineligible abstract idea, or that the claim elements "transform the nature of the claim into a patent-eligible application."

A trio of Federal Circuit cases has illuminated how substantively the court intends to interpret the threshold determination of whether a patent claim is "directed to" an abstract idea. First, an earlier case, DDR Holdings v. Hotels.com, 773 F.3d 1245, 1259 (Fed. Cir. 2014), made clear that this initial threshold determination encompasses all elements of the claim as an "ordered combination," and went on to find the claimed combination was not an abstract idea, despite involving software and the internet. In the more recent case of Enfish v. Microsoft, 832 F.3d 1327, 1334 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the Federal Circuit found that software patent claims for a database were patent-eligible because they were directed to a clearly defined improvement in computer operations. In McRO v. Bandai Namco Games America , 837 F. 3d 1299, 1315 (Fed. Cir. 2016), the court reversed a lower court's ruling and determined that a claim for lip-synchronization ¬animation software was sufficiently unique within its field, and described narrowly enough, so as not to be considered an abstract idea.

In each of these cases, the court has emphasized the advantages of patent claims including specific, nonpre-emptive language directed to the apparent benefit or purpose of an invention. The Enfish appellant's claim, for instance, sufficiently recites how the software in question improves upon the prior art by reducing database memory usage and load time. Meanwhile, the McRO claim was deemed eligible for the way it outlines a discrete rule set for automating lip animation, ensuring future patent opportunities for other kinds of similar, but technologically distinct, methods not covered by the claim. The Federal Circuit Court has additionally cautioned in these cases against a generalized interpretation of software claims as abstract ideas.

Section 112(f): The Functional Claiming Test

Because software claims are often written in so-called "functional" terms, if such a claim survives the abstract idea test above, it nonetheless must also pass muster under the tests associated with functional claims now codified under 35 U.S.C. Section 112(f). Enacted originally in 1952, Section 112(f), reads: "An element in a claim for a combination may be expressed as a means or step for performing a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof, and such claim shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof."

The statute, in other words, allows an invention to be claimed not merely by structural form, but by its function or purpose. Accordingly, as long as the patentee discloses adequate corresponding structures, and a person skilled in the art can reasonably surmise what structures the "means" or "step" language encompasses, the claim is likely valid under Section 112(f). Otherwise, the claim may be considered indefinite and invalid.

Patent practitioners may employ this means-plus-function format when claiming technically complex ¬inventions—in fields such as software, manufacturing, life sciences, and e-commerce—that may be prohibitively costly or verbose to express in other ways. Given that Section 112(f) limits such claims to the corresponding (disclosed) structure and equivalents thereof, certain patent practitioners may, either intentionally or inadvertently, avoid the means-plus-function format in favor of using other, arguably structural terms, along with any arguably related functions. While this approach may potentially broaden the claim scope by avoiding Section 112(f), it conversely may render the patent indefinite or otherwise overly broad and, hence, invalid.

It is in this context that the Federal Circuit rendered an en banc opinion in Williamson v. Citrix Online, 792 F.3d 1339 (Fed. Cir. 2015). The decision clarifies how software and other functional claims should be interpreted, regardless of whether the claim language is being construed during the patent application process, in USPTO proceedings, or in federal court litigation. Prior to the Williamson case, the court had established a legal presumption that the use of the term "means" indicated the presence of a means-plus-function claim, and that the strictures of Section 112(f) should be applied; however, in the converse situation, in the absence of the term "means," the Federal Circuit repeatedly held that there was a "strong" presumption, "not readily overcome," that the claim limitation is not subject to Section 112(f) as a functional claim limitation.

The Williamson decision weakened this latter presumption, and went on to affirm a district court's choice to construe the nonce term "module for" as synonymous with "means for." The claim under review contained the limitation "distributed learning control module," which the appellees characterized as "a generic 'black box' for performing the recited computer-implemented functions." Accordingly, the CAFC first held that the now weakened presumption against applying Section 112(f) to the "module" limitation had been overcome, requiring the "module," like "means," to be limited to a corresponding structure described in the patent. The court then held that the patent failed to disclose sufficient structure corresponding to the claim term. As a result, the claim was held indefinite and, therefore, invalid under 35 U.S.C. Section 112(b), a section requiring claims to "distinctly" define the ¬invention.

The court's overruling of the previous "strong" presumption has since influenced the actions taken by patent examiners in the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office. With the understanding that a number of different constructions (such as "module for," "system for," "device for" and "component for" ) may invoke Section 112(f), examiners have broadened the scope of what they consider means-plus-function claims. They have adopted a practice of rejecting many of such claims for indefiniteness, or have required patent practitioners to recite corresponding structures or otherwise place on the record the meaning of the rejected claim term during patent prosecution.

Ultimately, the clarifying aspect of these decisions represent good news for inventors. To borrow a term, the black box of patent eligibility and claim definiteness has become more transparent. Aspiring patentees should take heart in the fact that a varied and careful patent claiming strategy is likely to help meet the challenges enumerated above, whether before the U.S. Patent & Trademark Office, or in subsequent adversarial proceedings.

Originally published In The Legal Intelligencer, April 4, 2017.

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.

Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
In association with
Related Topics
Similar Articles
Relevancy Powered by MondaqAI
Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton
Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP
Related Articles
Related Video
Up-coming Events Search
Font Size:
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
Confirm Password
Mondaq Topics -- Select your Interests
 Law Performance
 Law Practice
 Media & IT
 Real Estate
 Wealth Mgt
Asia Pacific
European Union
Latin America
Middle East
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.


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.


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