February 24, 2023
Authored and Edited by Esther H. Lim; Spencer Perkins
In Hawk Technology Systems, LLC v. Castle Retail, LLC, No. 22-1222 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 17, 2023), the Federal Circuit affirmed a Western District of Tennessee decision granting Castle Retail’s motion to dismiss.
Hawk Technology sued Castle Retail for infringement of U.S. Patent No. 10,499,091. The ’091 patent is generally directed to a method of viewing multiple simultaneously displayed and stored video images on a remote viewing device of a video surveillance system. Castle Retail filed a motion to dismiss, arguing that the claims of the ’091 patent are directed to patent ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The district court granted the motion.
On appeal, the Federal Circuit analyzed the claims of the ’091 patent under the two-step Alice framework. Under Alice step one, the Court found the asserted patent is directed to the abstract idea of “video storage and display.” Under Alice step two, the Court determined that the asserted claims merely recited the performance of an abstract idea using conventional computers and broadband networks, and thus did not transform the abstract idea into a patent-eligible invention. The Federal Circuit also rejected Hawk Technology’s argument that the motion was procedurally premature and that the district court erred in considering Castle Retail’s testimony and evidence in deciding the motion. In doing so, the Court noted that the district court’s decision did not hinge on this evidence, and rejected Hawk Technology’s argument that the district court failed to convert the motion to dismiss to a summary judgment motion and thus determined that it was harmless error.
Copyright © 2023 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP.
DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.
Lecture
Patent Protection for Software-Related Inventions in Europe and the USA Training Course
June 5, 2024
Hybrid
Conference
Boston Intellectual Property Law Association 4th Annual Symposium
April 10-11, 2024
Boston
Conference
Best Practices in Intellectual Property– A Decade of Dedication to IP Excellence
April 8-9, 2024
Tel Aviv
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.