Results for abstract idea

Yanbin Yu, Zhongxuan Zhang v. Apple Inc.

Case Number: CLB0481

Date: 06.11.2021

A claim reciting a digital camera having multiple image sensors and a digital image processor that produces an enhanced image using two images acquired by the multiple image sensors is patent ineligible because the components are considered well-known, routine, and conventional.

view Case Detail Download PDF

Cellspin Soft, Inc. v. Fitbit, Inc.

Case Number: CLB0438

Date: 06.25.2019

The specification does not need to expressly list why the claimed invention is unconventional if the claims recite what is inventive, Berkheimer applies to motions under Rule 12(b)(6) in addition to applying at the summary judgment stage, and the presumption of patent validity includes a presumption of patent-eligibility.

view Case Detail Download PDF

Gottschalk v. Benson

Case Number: CLB0257

Date: 11.20.1972

The Supreme Court held that an invention claimed as a process that is (a) defined by an algorithm with no practical use except in the programmed manipulation of signals in a digital computer, and (b) not limited to a subset of possible applications, do not fall within the requirements of statutory subject matter under Section 101.

view Case Detail Download PDF

In re Comiskey

Case Number: CLB0164

Date: 09.20.2007

Mental processes, i.e., processes directed to abstract ideas that are not tied to specific machines and do not create or involve manufactures or compositions of matter, are not patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101, even if they have a practical application.

view Case Detail Download PDF