VERY IMPORTANT! This is an excerpt of Ropes &
Post# of 82686
(Total Views: 487)
Posted On: 11/29/2018 2:34:04 PM
VERY IMPORTANT!
This is an excerpt of Ropes & Gray's Appeal submittal from March 2018.
The District court in the Ancora VS HTC case at least signaled out 1 claim that seemed to fit the 35 U.S.C. § 101 description for early dismissal.
In SFOR's case, the District DIDN'T EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO DO THAT ! The court granted SecureAuth’s motion and invalidated ALL 43 ASSERTED CLAIMS in StrikeForce’s three asserted patents!!!!
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
1. Whether, at Alice step one, the district court erred in finding that all of the Asserted Claims are directed to an abstract idea by characterizing the claims too broadly as merely “providing restricted access to resources” ;
2.Whether, at Alice step two, the district court erred by assessing the “additional elements” of the Challenged Claims not against the abstract idea identified at step one, but against a narrower idea that subsumed the inventive “out-of-band” feature, in finding that the claims’ ordered combination of elements was not sufficient to make the claims patent-eligible; and
3.Whether the district court erred by finding the Asserted Claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, even though the fact issues, allegations, the patent specifications, and other supporting materials, when viewed in the light most favorable to non-movant StrikeForce as required for a motion to dismiss, supports StrikeForce’s assertion that the ordered combination of claimed elements is not well-understood, routine, and conventional at the time of the invention.
To read the entire Ropes & Gray Appeal of the District court's ruling, click here :
https://jumpshare.com/v/v16tJSqFzFgZ5JTVkOpH
This is an excerpt of Ropes & Gray's Appeal submittal from March 2018.
The District court in the Ancora VS HTC case at least signaled out 1 claim that seemed to fit the 35 U.S.C. § 101 description for early dismissal.
In SFOR's case, the District DIDN'T EVEN TAKE THE TIME TO DO THAT ! The court granted SecureAuth’s motion and invalidated ALL 43 ASSERTED CLAIMS in StrikeForce’s three asserted patents!!!!
STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES
1. Whether, at Alice step one, the district court erred in finding that all of the Asserted Claims are directed to an abstract idea by characterizing the claims too broadly as merely “providing restricted access to resources” ;
2.Whether, at Alice step two, the district court erred by assessing the “additional elements” of the Challenged Claims not against the abstract idea identified at step one, but against a narrower idea that subsumed the inventive “out-of-band” feature, in finding that the claims’ ordered combination of elements was not sufficient to make the claims patent-eligible; and
3.Whether the district court erred by finding the Asserted Claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, even though the fact issues, allegations, the patent specifications, and other supporting materials, when viewed in the light most favorable to non-movant StrikeForce as required for a motion to dismiss, supports StrikeForce’s assertion that the ordered combination of claimed elements is not well-understood, routine, and conventional at the time of the invention.
To read the entire Ropes & Gray Appeal of the District court's ruling, click here :
https://jumpshare.com/v/v16tJSqFzFgZ5JTVkOpH
(6)
(0)