Federal Circuit Finds Video Surveillance Patent Ineligible Under Alice

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.