直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit KOs Gaming Patent

May 15, 2023

Authored and Edited by Angeline L. Premraj; Caitlin E. Fowler; Elizabeth D. Ferrill

In Bot M8 LLC v. Sony Interactive Entertainment LLC, No. 22-1291 (Fed. Cir. May 9, 2023), the Federal Circuit affirmed a final written decision from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board determining all challenged claims of Bot M8’s gaming machine patent unpatentable. There were two issues before the Federal Circuit on appeal: (1) whether an erroneous claim construction tainted the Board’s unpatentability determination regarding the independent claims; and (2) whether the cited references’ lack of a limitation precluded the Board’s obviousness finding regarding the dependent claims.

On the first issue, the Federal Circuit found that even if the Board misconstrued the type of data that may be written to the motherboard before authenticating the game program, Bot M8 failed to show that the Board relied on that construction in finding the independent claims unpatentable. Thus, the Court explained that any error was harmless and affirmed the Board’s obviousness determination as to the independent claims. On the second issue, the Federal Circuit found that substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding of a motivation to combine based the references themselves and the explanation of Sony’s expert.  The Court further found no error in the Board’s determination that even though none of the references taught using two different computers for two separate authentication processes as claimed, one of ordinary skill in the art would have nevertheless been motivated to combine the references to yield the claimed system. Thus, the Court also affirmed the Board’s unpatentability determination as to the dependent claims.

Tags

Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), validity, Obviousness (35 USC § 103), combining references, claim construction

Related Practices

Appeals from the PTAB

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

PTAB Invalidation Proceedings: IPR and PGR

Related Industries

Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure

Gaming

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Contacts

Elizabeth D. Ferrill
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4445
Email

Related Insights

Conference

4th Global Patent Litigation FORUM

October 29, 2026

Munich

Lecture

Resolving Patent Suits Without Settlement Payments

September 3, 2026

Virtual

Webinar

U.S. Patent Case Law Update 2026

July 23, 2026

Webinar

Webinar

Successful Strategies to Win Alice Motions and Fee Awards in Patent Cases Against Non-Practicing Entities

July 22, 2026

Webinar

Federal Circuit IP Blog

“2” Does Not Provide Written Description Support for “1”: Federal Circuit Affirms District Court’s Invalidation of Patent

July 8, 2026

Federal Circuit IP Blog

Federal Circuit Vacates and Remands Infringement and Damages Judgment After Erroneous Verdict Form and Eligibility Analysis

July 8, 2026

At the PTAB Blog

Federal Circuit PTAB Appeal Statistics for March–May 2026

July 2, 2026

Articles

Article_D.-Mass-Patent-Litigation-Update-October-2024

D. Mass. Patent Litigation Update: May 2026

June 30, 2026

Articles

How Low Can You Go? Courts Lower Marking Defense Burden, Raising Patent Damages Risks

June 29, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP