Federal Circuit’s Unconventionality Approach to Patent-Ineligibility Challenges in a Motion to Dismiss | NCCU Academic Hub

學術產出-Periodical Articles

Article View/Open

pdf(208)

Publication Export

Google Scholar^TM

政大圖書館

學術資源探索系統

Citation Infomation

No doi shows Citation Infomation

Simple Record
Full Record

題名	Federal Circuit’s Unconventionality Approach to Patent-Ineligibility Challenges in a Motion to Dismiss
作者	陳秉訓 Chen, Ping-Hsun
貢獻者	科管智財所
關鍵詞	Patent-eligibility;35 U.S.C. § 101; inventive concept;unconventional;non conventional
日期	2021-07
上傳時間	11-Apr-2022 14:32:17 (UTC+8)
摘要	Under Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank International, when a claim is found directed to a patent-ineligible subject matter, the claim is still patent-eligible if it includes an inventive concept. The Federal Circuit’s case law has indicated that an alleged inventive concept with unconventionality may satisfy step two of the Alice standard. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that the case law suggests a way to prove such unconventionality. That is, a patent specification or a patentee’s complaint must include four topics: (1) prior art technology; (2) how a system executing the claimed invention performs differently from the prior art technology; (3) the benefits derived from the claimed unconventional system; and (4) a specific feature operating differently from the prior art technology. With these factual statements, a patent may survive a patent-ineligibility challenge in a motion to dismiss. patent-ineligible subject matter, the claim is still patent-eligible if it includes an inventive concept. The Federal Circuit’s case law has indicated that an alleged inventive concept with unconventionality may satisfy step two of the Alice standard. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that the case law suggests a way to prove such unconventionality. That is, a patent specification or a patentee’s complaint must include four topics: (1) prior art technology; (2) how a system executing the claimed invention performs differently from the prior art technology; (3) the benefits derived from the claimed unconventional system; and (4) a specific feature operating differently from the prior art technology. With these factual statements, a patent may survive a patent-ineligibility challenge in a motion to dismiss.
關聯	UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law, Vol.20, No.4, pp.331-357
資料類型	article

dc.contributor	科管智財所
dc.creator (作者)	陳秉訓
dc.creator (作者)	Chen, Ping-Hsun
dc.date (日期)	2021-07
dc.date.accessioned	11-Apr-2022 14:32:17 (UTC+8)	-
dc.date.available	11-Apr-2022 14:32:17 (UTC+8)	-
dc.date.issued (上傳時間)	11-Apr-2022 14:32:17 (UTC+8)	-
dc.identifier.uri (URI)	http://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139804	-
dc.description.abstract (摘要)	Under Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank International, when a claim is found directed to a patent-ineligible subject matter, the claim is still patent-eligible if it includes an inventive concept. The Federal Circuit’s case law has indicated that an alleged inventive concept with unconventionality may satisfy step two of the Alice standard. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that the case law suggests a way to prove such unconventionality. That is, a patent specification or a patentee’s complaint must include four topics: (1) prior art technology; (2) how a system executing the claimed invention performs differently from the prior art technology; (3) the benefits derived from the claimed unconventional system; and (4) a specific feature operating differently from the prior art technology. With these factual statements, a patent may survive a patent-ineligibility challenge in a motion to dismiss. patent-ineligible subject matter, the claim is still patent-eligible if it includes an inventive concept. The Federal Circuit’s case law has indicated that an alleged inventive concept with unconventionality may satisfy step two of the Alice standard. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that the case law suggests a way to prove such unconventionality. That is, a patent specification or a patentee’s complaint must include four topics: (1) prior art technology; (2) how a system executing the claimed invention performs differently from the prior art technology; (3) the benefits derived from the claimed unconventional system; and (4) a specific feature operating differently from the prior art technology. With these factual statements, a patent may survive a patent-ineligibility challenge in a motion to dismiss.
dc.format.extent	508429 bytes	-
dc.format.mimetype	application/pdf	-
dc.relation (關聯)	UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law, Vol.20, No.4, pp.331-357
dc.subject (關鍵詞)	Patent-eligibility;35 U.S.C. § 101; inventive concept;unconventional;non conventional
dc.title (題名)	Federal Circuit’s Unconventionality Approach to Patent-Ineligibility Challenges in a Motion to Dismiss
dc.type (資料類型)	article