Thank you ZPaul. I do not believe Ropes & Gray needed any of the overwhelming recent events to prevail. I question whether SecureAuth/Knobbe Martins ever intended on winning this case or if they intention was to delay this until after their merger in December. Either way, your article puts front and center what SA stated about SFOR's patent:
Medical Treatment Patent Claims Held Patentable Subject Matter Under the Alice/Mayo Section 101 Test
Antoinette F. Konski
POSTED BY ANTOINETTE F. KONSKI ON 28 MAY 2018
b]The Federal Circuit’s Analysis – The Majority View[/b]
In analyzing patent-eligibility under Section 101, the Federal Circuit cited the two-part framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court as recited in Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014) (“Alice”). Step one of the test requires a determination “whether the claims at issue are directed to one of the patent-ineligible concepts of laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas.” Slip Op. at 27-28. If the claims are found not to be directed to a patent-ineligible concept, the court need not proceed to step 2 of the analysis.
The Federal Circuit determined that the challenged claims were not directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under step 1 of the two-part Alice/Mayo test. The Federal Circuit focused on the treatment element of the claims and noted that unlike the challenged Mayo claims, the ‘610 Patent claims are directed to a novel treatment method. The Mayo claims, in contrast, were directed to a diagnostic method based on the “‘relationships between concentrations of certain metabolites in the blood and the likelihood that a dosage of thiopurine drug will prove ineffective or cause harm.’” Slip Op. at 29
SecureAuth called Strikeforce's patent "abstract" even though numerous OOBA methods were included. The patent they have is the strongest patent under United States law...'a utility patent'...SFOR's is not a process patent. Additionally, many folks mat not be aware but Strikeforce was given 100% eligibility under their patent. Patents can be awarded with partial eligibility percentages.
The PTAB (TWICE), Microsoft as well as the other infringers never thought of Alice 35/101 to discredit SFOR's utility patent as not-inventive. Why? Because they are inventive or else they would have since Alice 35/101 has been around since 2014. Ironically enough, SFOR has had multiple utility patents for OOBA & MFA for several years now without challenge.
SecureAuth, I believe the final nail in your downfall will start on Monday and end days later!
Medical Treatment Patent Claims Held Patentable Subject Matter Under the Alice/Mayo Section 101 Test
Antoinette F. Konski
POSTED BY ANTOINETTE F. KONSKI ON 28 MAY 2018
b]The Federal Circuit’s Analysis – The Majority View[/b]
In analyzing patent-eligibility under Section 101, the Federal Circuit cited the two-part framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court as recited in Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 2355 (2014) (“Alice”). Step one of the test requires a determination “whether the claims at issue are directed to one of the patent-ineligible concepts of laws of nature, natural phenomena and abstract ideas.” Slip Op. at 27-28. If the claims are found not to be directed to a patent-ineligible concept, the court need not proceed to step 2 of the analysis.
The Federal Circuit determined that the challenged claims were not directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under step 1 of the two-part Alice/Mayo test. The Federal Circuit focused on the treatment element of the claims and noted that unlike the challenged Mayo claims, the ‘610 Patent claims are directed to a novel treatment method. The Mayo claims, in contrast, were directed to a diagnostic method based on the “‘relationships between concentrations of certain metabolites in the blood and the likelihood that a dosage of thiopurine drug will prove ineffective or cause harm.’” Slip Op. at 29
SecureAuth called Strikeforce's patent "abstract" even though numerous OOBA methods were included. The patent they have is the strongest patent under United States law...'a utility patent'...SFOR's is not a process patent. Additionally, many folks mat not be aware but Strikeforce was given 100% eligibility under their patent. Patents can be awarded with partial eligibility percentages.
The PTAB (TWICE), Microsoft as well as the other infringers never thought of Alice 35/101 to discredit SFOR's utility patent as not-inventive. Why? Because they are inventive or else they would have since Alice 35/101 has been around since 2014. Ironically enough, SFOR has had multiple utility patents for OOBA & MFA for several years now without challenge.
SecureAuth, I believe the final nail in your downfall will start on Monday and end days later!
9
