In Yu v. Apple Inc., the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit invalidated a digital camera patent as abstract. The decision implies that the court is taking a broader interpretation of what technologies can fall under Alice's purview. Practitioners are concerned that this decision opens the door to invalidate patents on mechanical inventions as abstract rather than looking at whether the patent is novel. As Alice is increasingly being expanded to invalidate patents for inventions of tangible items that have long been considered off-limits, practitioners are struggling to figure out what is patent eligible and what is not. Finnegan partner Kevin Rodkey cautioned patent owners. "A court's not going to say just because you have a mechanical invention, you're absolved from 101," he said.
Read, "Fed. Circ.'s Camera Patent Ax Makes Eligibility Rules Murkier"
Media Mention
Women in Business Law Americas Awards 2024: Three Finnegan Attorneys Shortlisted
April 7, 2024
Press Release
Finnegan and BMW Group Successfully Demolish Non-Practicing Entity NorthStar’s Efforts
April 3, 2024
Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.
We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.
Finnegan is thrilled to announce the launch of our new blog, Ad Law Buzz, devoted solely to breaking news, developments, trends, and analysis in advertising law.