The Federal Circuit not too long ago provided strategic assistance for defending program promises against Alice challenges that statements recite ineligible patent subject matter make any difference under 35 U.S.C. § 101. In Mentone Answers LLC v. Digi Global Inc., defendants alleged that consultant assert 5 of U.S. Patent No. 6,952,413, directed in the direction of allocating details channels utilizing shifted uplink status flags in cellular cellular stations, claimed only an summary idea. The District Court docket agreed and dismissed. On enchantment, the Federal Circuit reversed, keeping that declare 5 is not directed to an abstract notion simply because the assert enhanced the features of a pc.
Steerage Primarily based on the CAFC Determination
The Mentone conclusion, while non-precedential, gives additional perception into how to triumph over § 101 problems, this kind of as working with coined terms by the inventor in the declare language, depicting the specialized deficiencies in the figures, depicting the technological advantages in the figures, and reciting particular assert language that captures the complex rewards of the specific technical difficulty. Once the patent application’s specification has been drafted and submitted, long right before litigation commences, the methods can no lengthier be executed. Practitioners should really consequently be conscious when drafting the specification to handle these locations that might create in normal Alice immunity, thus boosting the price of the patent assets.
The Patent-Qualified Declare of U.S. Patent No. 6,952,413
The declare at difficulty delivered a sequence of system steps relevant to allocating assets on packet details channels:
5. A multiple accessibility communication strategy in a cellular station, comprising the ways of:
obtaining an assignment of at minimum a initially PDCH (packet data channel) and a second PDCH
monitoring an assigned PDCH to detect a USF and
transmitting on an assigned PDCH corresponding to the USF,
wherein (i) if shifted USF procedure is not made use of then a initially assigned PDCH is monitored to detect a USF corresponding to the initial assigned PDCH and (ii) if the shifted USF procedure is applied then a 2nd assigned PDCH is monitored to detect the USF corresponding to the first assigned PDCH and a USF corresponding to the second assigned PDCH.
The assert handles a technique for mobile cellular stations. The cellular mobile stations can have packet details channels (PDCHs) for downlink and uplink functions in between mobile telephones and a community. The mobile stations can allocate a PDCH to be made use of for downlink and uplink operations. Downlink operations include things like obtaining information and facts from the community and uplink operations consist of transmitting data to the network.
Uplink standing flags can show irrespective of whether a packet info channel is to swap from getting information from a network (e.g., downlink functions) to transferring data to a network (e.g., uplink operations) by using an assignment. But often the switch-all-around time and the fastened timing romance amongst the downlink signaling and the subsequent uplink operation signifies that the assignment cannot be carried out. The incapability to assign a PDCH for uplink functions minimizes the availability of uplink operations, thereby decreasing the stream of information and adaptability of response to altering disorders.
The declare makes use of shifted uplink position flags (“shifted USFs”) to regulate entry to the PDCHs. The shifted USFs conquer the limitations of USFs by altering the fastened timing romantic relationship of the downlink signaling and enabling the cell station to swap to uplink operations supplied the turn-all-around time.
Declare 5 is Not Directed to an Summary Thought – Courtroom Reasoning and Investigation
The Federal Circuit rejected the perspective that the declare was simply just the abstract concept of “receiving an uplink status flag and transmitting facts through the correct timeslots.” In its place, the Federal Circuit identified the patent enhanced pcs, especially mobile devices, by declaring USFs that broke the set timing connection in between the receipt of the USF in the course of a downlink procedure and the subsequent uplink operations. These enhancements resolved the facts-network difficulty induced by the mounted marriage involving USFs in a downlink slot and the availability for transmission in the corresponding uplink slot. As set up precedent reveals, increasing existing laptop or computer systems demonstrates that an plan is not a patent ineligible abstract notion.
The Court relied on a number of features of the assert language and specification to establish assert 5 as patent eligible beneath § 101. Very first, the claim recited “shifted USF,” which was a expression coined by the inventor. Second, the assert recited unique abilities this kind of as monitoring, in reaction to detecting a shifted USF procedure, a 2nd assigned PDCH to “detect the USF corresponding to the initially assigned PDCH and a USF corresponding to the 2nd assigned PDCH” and transmitting on both of those PDCHs accordingly. 3rd, claim 5 improved existing devices by breaking the fastened romantic relationship in the timing of downlink allocation signaling (i.e., receipt of a USF on a timeslot) and subsequent uplink transmission. Eventually, the specification showed an case in point of the deficiency in the prior art (this kind of as the impermissible configuration of Figure 3) and proposed a alternative: a new configuration using a shifted USF that allows the cell station adequate turn-about time to switch from downlink operations to uplink operations.
The Federal Circuit’s reversal of the District Court also relied on the specialized problems and technological strengths introduced in the figures of the challenged patent. A lot more precisely, the figures depicted the restrictions of the prior art and how the mounted timing relationship designed some uplink configurations unavailable. For example, Figures 2 and 3 depth the constraints of a USF due to slot allocation constraints connected to the fixed timing relationship. Also, the figures clearly show how the complex improvement of the shifted USFs triumph over the unique challenge linked to the fastened timing connection. For illustration, Figures 4 and 5 clearly show the cell stations monitoring the 2nd downlink slot for the shifted USF as a substitute of the 1st downlink slot for the to start with USF. More, Figure 7 demonstrates how the components of claim 5, which include obtaining and monitoring information and facts in two individual PDCHs, perform alongside one another to supply that ingenious answer. The specialized strengths articulated by the figures show that assert 5 is not abstract by doing away with limitations to mobile station configurations.
The decision presents course pertaining to tactics patent practitioners can use to refute arguments that unfairly decrease application promises to a mere summary strategy ineligible under § 101. Patent drafters may possibly reward from depicting justifications (exactly where feasible) making use of diagrams of the claimed advantages about the prior art. Litigants can afterwards place to these figures depicting the technical complications and technological solutions to conquer Alice and aid a conclusion of patent qualified statements. In addition, the patent drafters could include conversations of: (1) coined phrases used in the statements that address the issues discovered in the specification, (2) how the invention improves on prior artwork, and (3) the figures that depict the precise ways to carry out the complex rewards.
©1994-2022 Mintz, Levin, Cohn, Ferris, Glovsky and Popeo, P.C. All Legal rights Reserved.Nationwide Regulation Review, Volume XII, Quantity 31