(Total Views: 452)
Posted On: 11/29/2018 1:57:28 PM
Post# of 82686
To make sure we understand. Ancora is the equivalent to SFOR. HTC is the equivalent to SecureAuth. HTC is represented by Knobbe Martens just like SecureAuth is in the SFOR case.
Knobbe Martens, on their own website, they has published their own loss !
https://www.knobbe.com/news/2018/11/ancora-te...merica-inc
ANCORA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HTC AMERICA, INC.
By Bryan J. Johnson and Karen M. Cassidy
November 16, 2018
Federal Circuit Summaries
Before Dyk, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Summary: Claims directed to improving computer security by using BIOS memory to store a license can be a non-abstract computer-functionality improvement if done by a specific technique that departs from earlier approaches to solve a specific computer problem.
The district court granted HTC’s motion to dismiss, concluding that the claims are directed to, and ultimately claim no more than, an abstract idea using generic computer hardware for their intended purposes.
The Federal Circuit reversed , finding that the claims are not directed to ineligible subject matter, but to a solution to a computer-functionality problem under Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and related authorities. The Court found that the claimed advance relies on specific and unique characteristics of certain aspects of the BIOS that the patent asserts were not previously used in the way now claimed, and the result is a beneficial reduction of the risk of hacking.
Knobbe Martens, on their own website, they has published their own loss !
https://www.knobbe.com/news/2018/11/ancora-te...merica-inc
ANCORA TECHNOLOGIES, INC. v. HTC AMERICA, INC.
By Bryan J. Johnson and Karen M. Cassidy
November 16, 2018
Federal Circuit Summaries
Before Dyk, Wallach, and Taranto. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington
Summary: Claims directed to improving computer security by using BIOS memory to store a license can be a non-abstract computer-functionality improvement if done by a specific technique that departs from earlier approaches to solve a specific computer problem.
The district court granted HTC’s motion to dismiss, concluding that the claims are directed to, and ultimately claim no more than, an abstract idea using generic computer hardware for their intended purposes.
The Federal Circuit reversed , finding that the claims are not directed to ineligible subject matter, but to a solution to a computer-functionality problem under Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corp., 822 F.3d 1327 (Fed. Cir. 2016), and related authorities. The Court found that the claimed advance relies on specific and unique characteristics of certain aspects of the BIOS that the patent asserts were not previously used in the way now claimed, and the result is a beneficial reduction of the risk of hacking.
(13)
(0)
