(Total Views: 704)
Posted On: 06/05/2018 4:34:38 PM
Post# of 82676
The April 2018 Supreme Court ruling and the 100% favorable PTAB ruling in October 2017 vs One District Court with a Alice 35/101 early dismissal. The Court decided to provide no other grounds for dismissal other than Alice.
The below excerpt is from one of SecureAuth's attorney's at Knobbe Martens. She boasts that ALL THREE SFOR PATENTS and ALL of their 43 claims were dismissed by CA 9th District Court.
Hmmmm...
Supreme Court & PTAB say all SFOR claims are valid.
ONE Judge in a CA District Court says not they are not based on Alice 35/101.
Hmmmm...
Knobbe Martens
Andrea Cheek - Partner
Representative Matters
Strikeforce Technologies, Inc. v. SecureAuth Corporation (C.D. Cal. 2017) Represented SecureAuth in a patent litigation suit involving three patents asserted against SecureAuth. Obtained a dismissal with prejudice that invalidated all 43 asserted claims in StrikeForce’s three asserted patents.
The below excerpt is from one of SecureAuth's attorney's at Knobbe Martens. She boasts that ALL THREE SFOR PATENTS and ALL of their 43 claims were dismissed by CA 9th District Court.
Hmmmm...
Supreme Court & PTAB say all SFOR claims are valid.
ONE Judge in a CA District Court says not they are not based on Alice 35/101.
Hmmmm...
Knobbe Martens
Andrea Cheek - Partner
Representative Matters
Strikeforce Technologies, Inc. v. SecureAuth Corporation (C.D. Cal. 2017) Represented SecureAuth in a patent litigation suit involving three patents asserted against SecureAuth. Obtained a dismissal with prejudice that invalidated all 43 asserted claims in StrikeForce’s three asserted patents.
(7)
(0)Scroll down for more posts ▼
