No. 19-1435
C. Douglass Thomas v. Andrei Iancu, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office
Response Waived
Tags: alice-mayo-framework alice-v-cls-bank claim-limitations computer-technology diehr-v-diamond inventive-concept mayo-v-prometheus nonobviousness patent-eligibility software-innovation software-patents
Latest Conference:
2020-09-29
Question Presented (from Petition)
1. Whether software innovations, simply because they are implemented on a general purpose computer, are ineligible for patenting unless they claim some hardware limitations beyond a general purpose computer that provide an improvement to computer technology.
2. Whether, contrary to Diehr, claim limitations can be ignored, under the guise of the Mayo/Alice framework, when a claim is evaluated for presence of an inventive concept, even when the ignored claim limitations were found to be nonobviousess.
Question Presented (AI Summary)
Whether software innovations implemented on a general purpose computer are patent-eligible
Docket Entries
2020-10-05
Petition DENIED.
2020-07-22
DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 9/29/2020.
2020-07-20
Waiver of right of respondent Andrei Iancu, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office to respond filed.
2020-06-24
Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due July 29, 2020)
Attorneys
Andrei Iancu, Director, United States Patent and Trademark Office
Jeffrey B. Wall — Acting Solicitor General, Respondent
C. Douglass Thomas
Charles Douglass Thomas — TI Law Group, Petitioner