Please enable JavaScript.

Coggle requires JavaScript to display documents.

申請專利範圍期末報告 (延伸資料 (5-3. 35 U.S.C. § 102, 5-4. 35 U.S.C. § 103, 5-2.…

- - - - SOVEREIGN IMMUNITY
        
        " 35. U.S.C. § 101, 35. U.S.C. § 102, 35. U.S.C. § 103 "
        
        Sovereign immunity under the Eleventh Amendment : --{ Covidien v. University of Florida Research Foundation }--
        
        " 35 U.S.C. § 282 " : 可另外參考" enpan's Patent & Linux practice - 35 U.S.C. § 282 "
      - ELIGIBILITY UNDER § 101
        
        ’251 patent Claim
        
        3-1. EspaceNet
        
        3-2. '251 patent
        
        Such claims are directed to Abstract Ideas. The CAUSE of the ’251 patent invention :
        
        (1.) On its face, the ’251 patent seeks to automate “pen and paper methodologies” to conserve human resources and minimize errors.
        (2.) This is a quintessential “do it on a computer” patent: it acknowledges that data from bedside machines was previously collected, analyzed, manipulated, and displayed manually, and it simply proposes doing so with a computer.
        
        We cannot see in the claims, any “ specific improvement to the way computers operate ” .
        
        Neither the ’251 patent, nor its claims, explains how the drivers do the COVERSION that UFRF points to. That is, the drivers are described in purely functional terms: they “facilitate data exchanges,” “convert received data streams to a format independent of any particular bedside machine,” “translate the data stream,” “interpret data streams,” “facilitate communications with the bedside machine,” and “interpret discrete segments” in a “data stream for the machine.”
        
        (FROM: DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION)
        
        18 Claims: (C1.) Method、(C6) System、(C9.) System、(C14.) Machine-readable storage having stored thereon → purely functional terms
        
        Alice two-step
        
        Points
        
        Step 1. At Alice step one, it determined the claims are directed to the abstract idea of “collecting, analyzing, manipulating, and displaying data.”
        
        Step 2. At Alice step two, it determined the claims did not recite an inventive concept.
        
        18 Claims: (C1.) Method、(C6) System、(C9.) System、(C14.) Machine-readable storage having stored thereon
        
        USPTO October 2019 Patent Eligibility
  - - - GE argued the claims of the ’251 patent are directed to ineligible subject matter under 35. U.S.C. § 101.
      - The district court granted GE’s motion.
      - UFRF sued GE alleging infringement of the ’251 patent.\
      - Applying the twostep framework set forth in Alice Corp. Party Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208, 217 (2014), the district court determined the claims of the ’251 patent are directed to an abstract idea and do not recite an inventive concept.
  - - - Based on the aforementioned points, we affirm the district court’s dismissal.
      - Eligibility is a question of law based on underlying facts.
      - The ’251 patent fails to provide any technical details for the tangible components, instead predominately describe(ing) the system and methods in purely functional terms.
      - The claims do no “more than simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea . . . on a generic computer.” (Alice, 573 U.S. at 225.)
      - We hold that they are not patent eligible under § 101.
  - - - Defendant:General Electric Company, GE Medical Systems Information Technologies, Inc., and GE Medical Systems, Inc. ( Collectively, As “ GE ” )
      - Patent: UFRF is the assignee of U.S. Patent No. 7062251
        “ Managing Critical Care Physiologic Data Using Data Synthesis Technology ” ( As “ ’251 patent ” )
      - Plaintiff: The University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. ( As “ UFRF ” )