INTRODUCTION
After rejecting all prior pleas to clarify the Alice test, this Court should perceive why the situation is now materially different. The bridge to the technological future is crumbling under the Federal Circuit’s chaotic
deadlock. Quibbling over which vehicle will traverse the abyss forestalls the cure that only this Court can provide. This is one of three cases currently pending that present precisely the same legal questions this Court
has had under consideration for 1-1/2 years in American Axle, No. 20-891 (decided below by the same district judge as this case). With the presumably imminent filing of the Solicitor General’s views in American Axle, the Court
approaches the precipice of finally resolving the confusion, conflicting results, and lack of predictable justice in this critical area of constitutionally protected property rights. Under the principle of uniform application of the law,
the same test of patent eligibility should govern all the pending cases. As the petition explained, the entire relevant universe recognizes the urgent need for this Court’s review of the foundational issues of §101 patent eligibility presented in
this case. With each passing day, the urgency intensifies.
Monday, May 16, 2022
US Supreme Court Rejects Plea To Clarify '101 Alice In Apple Case
Ameranth Files Appeal for Cert To The US Supreme Court To Protect The Eligibility Of Its ‘651 IAA Patent - While Further Aligning With The Still Pending American Axle, Cert Petition
QUESTIONS PRESENTED
This computer-based patent infringement case presents the same questions pending before the Court in American Axle & Mfg, Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, No. 20-891. Both petitions arise from judgments entered by the same district court judge. Ameranth filed an amicus brief in support of certiorari in American Axle specifically identifying this case as one that will be affected by the result in No. 20-891. Although the cases involve different parties, inventions and patents, they both raise the same legal questions:
1. What is the appropriate standard for determining whether a patent claim is “directed to” a patent-ineligible concept under step 1 of the Alice two-step framework for determining whether an invention is eligible for patenting under 35 U.S.C. § 101?
2. Is patent eligibility (at each step of the Court’s two-step framework) a question of law for the court, based on the scope of the claims alone or a question of fact, based on the state of art at the time of the invention?
This is one of the thousands of cases in which patents issued by the USPTO, bearing the presumption of validity that can only be overcome by clear and convincing evidence, have summarily perished in district courts adopting conflicting interpretations of § 101. In the last eight years, federal courts applied overly expansive inconsistent views of Alice to eviscerate the “new and useful” test of 35 U.S.C. § 101. They have directly declared thousands of inventions “abstract” and patent ineligible, and the pervasive cloud of uncertainty has indirectly frozen out tens of thousands more.
CONCLUSION: The petition for a writ of certiorari should be granted. Alternatively, the Court should consider prudent ways to coordinate its disposition of this petition with other pending cases presenting questions under 35 U.S.C. § 101, including holding this case pending resolution of American Axle.
Payment Co. Tells Supreme Court Justices Its Case Is 'Perfect' To Clarify '101 - Alice, (Or Hold Its Appeal, for the Soon To Be Decided, American Axle)
“While the Court has not yet granted American Axle’s petition, there are clearly a number of stakeholders who believe it’s time for it to weigh in again on patent ineligibility. Perhaps an affirmative recommendation from the SG will provide the impetus needed for the Court to add a second IP case to its 2022 calendar to address this issue."
Top Section 101 Patent Eligibility Stories of 2021-
The Supreme Court Continues to Ignore Section 101 … for Now
As Vidal noted during her hearing, many are looking to the Supreme Court to address patent eligibility. So far, the Court has said no thanks with a notable exception: American Axle & Manufacturing v. Neapco Holdings. The Supreme Court called for the views of the Solicitor General, and those views should be submitted any time now. My current prediction is that the Solicitor General recommends granting cert – and that the Supreme Court agrees.
The extreme uncertainty that U.S. patent eligibility “validity goulash” jurisprudence has caused is wreaking havoc on inventors, especially those working on emerging technologies. It is also hindering patent owners’ ability to enforce their property rights, investment and licensing deal-making, and giving China advantages in global competitiveness.
Wednesday, October 6, 2021
101 Eligibility - Turning Application On-and-Off for Authentication Patent Eligible
Fed. Circ. Urged To Tackle Alice 'Uncertainty' On Payment IP By Britain Eakin
Universal Secure Registry wants the full Federal Circuit to review a decision affirming the invalidity of secure transaction patents it accused Apple and Visa of infringing, arguing the court is increasingly wiping out patents under Alice that should be found eligible. In a petition for rehearing filed Monday, Universal Secure Registry LLC argued that its four patents were among the casualties of the ax it said the Federal Circuit "has wielded with increasing frequency" to invalidate patents under Alice. It cautioned that the current state of patent eligibility jurisprudence is destabilizing technologic development. "This trend has unsettled expectations and created uncertainty as the court's highly fact-specific rulings defy any predictable pattern. The resulting uncertainty about eligibility discourages the innovation that is the engine of the nation's patent system," the petition said.
Still Waiting
Meanwhile, back at the U.S. patent bar, the USPTO, Federal Circuit, Supreme Court, and Congress have not cleared the Alice Section 101 confusion. As former – and still to be replaced – USPTO Director Andrei Iancu stated in his farewell speech at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce on January 19, 2021, “Will [we] finally resolve this issue that has plagued our [patent] system for the past decade?” We’re still waiting…
Wednesday, August 4, 2021
Ameranth Awarded $1M Judgement Against Splickit For Its Failure to Pay Required Patent License Fees
'It appears that we have not yet seen the most invasive nature of contemporary patent eligibility doctrine. Case in point: Yu v. Apple Inc. (Fed. Cir. June 11, 2021)'.
Federal Circuit Judge Rebukes Panel For '101/Alice Ax Of Camera Patent
'Although today's Section 101 uncertainties have arisen primarily in the biological and computer-implemented technologies, all fields are affected," she wrote in her dissent. "The case before us enlarges this instability in all fields, for the court holds that the question of whether the components of a new device are well-known and conventional affects Section 101 eligibility, without reaching the patentability criteria of novelty and non-obviousness.'
Friday, May 28, 2021
Ameranth Default Judgement Motion Against Splick-it Inc. Filed
[Ameranth Will Promptly Appeal This Ruling To The Federal Circuit - Due To Its Multiple Errors Of Law/Fact. In Addition And In Parallel, the US Supreme Court Is Anticipated To Grant The American Axle '101 Law Appeal In Fall 2021, Which - If So - Would/Will Likely Also Overturn This Ruling.]
Tuesday, May 4, 2021
High Court is Poised to Un-Muddy the Section 101 Waters Nearly Seven Years After Alice
Anticipated US Supreme Court American Axle Cert Petition Grant Approval (If accepted - For Supreme Court Review – (As Is Expected), Most Experts, Anticipate That the SC Will Clarify/Correct ‘101 law In Such A Way - As To Reverse/Overturn All Of Ameranth’s Recent ‘101 Ruling Losses)
Friday, April 30, 2021
Supreme Court Conference To Decide On Whether To Grant the American Axle '101 Cert Appeal Petition
Monday, April 26, 2021
The Next Era Of The Federal Circuit - (To Be Led by Chief Judge Moore) - Is Hoped to be More Reasonable and Fair, Especially On '101 Law
The letter comes as Tillis has promised to focus more on patent eligibility by bringing it up when confirming former USPTO Andrei Iancu's replacement and by filing amicus briefs at the U.S. Supreme Court.
"Our patent eligibility jurisprudence is in shambles," Tillis said at a January event. "The fact that we have courts saying a garage door opener is an abstract idea and that innovative diagnostic tests are just laws of nature is bewildering to me. If we do not provide great clarity and consistency in this area of law, America will lose the 21st century innovation race."
Sens. Asks USPTO To Review '101 Patent Eligibility Last
Justices Told Fed. Circ. 'Crying Out' For '101 Patent Eligibility Help
"The Federal Circuit sent increasingly blurred messages to litigants and inventors," Ameranth Inc. said in another brief. "Today, when the fate of patent claims worth millions or billions of dollars hang in the balance, the outcome depends on which side of the 6-6 American Axle divide comprises the panel majority in your case. To inventors and litigants, that becomes a very expensive, very perilous coin flip."
Ameranth, which had its own patent invalidated under Section 101, asked, "How can inventors meet a standard that even the ultimate arbiters of patent eligibility cannot articulate and apply uniformly?"
Ameranth Approved for Strong New Hospitality - Parallel Processing Based Mobile Device Patent, Including First Ever ‘Non Hospitality’ Claims i.e. Now Also Including The ‘Appointments’ Market.
Ameranth Files Strong New Supreme Court Amicus Brief in Support Of American Axle Petition and ‘101 Law Problems And Which Was Joined By Four More Concurrent Amicus Briefs, By Renowned Leaders Of the Patent World.
Ameranth is a small development company founded 25 years ago and still led by its principal inventor. It has seen long issued and successfully licensed patents, representing true innovation that the industry recognized, retroactively eviscerated under standards and procedures recently created by district courts and the Federal Circuit. When first introduced, Ameranth’s inventions for mobile-wireless ordering and payment processing in restaurants were hailed as almost like science fiction and “poised to become the industry standard.” Rita Gunther McGrath and Ian C. MacMillan, Market Busters: 40 Strategic Moves that Drive Exceptional Business Growth, Harvard Bus. School Press 34-35 (2004). See 4
Wireless Finds a Welcome in Hospitality, Bloomberg Businessweek (Feb. 8, 2004), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2004-02-08/wireless-finds-a-welcome-in-hospitality (“not quite Star Trek”).
Key luminaries in the field recognized Ameranth’s scientific achievements. In nominating Ameranth for one on the many honors it was awarded, Bill Gates put it succinctly: “Ameranth is one of the leading pioneers of the information technology age for the betterment of mankind.” CISION PR Newswire, “Ameranth Significantly Expands Enforcement of Its Patented 21st Century Communications™ Web/Wireless Data/Display Synchronization Inventions,” (July 2 2012), https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/ameranth-significantly-expandsenforcement-of-its-patented-21st-centurycommunications-webwireless-datadisplaysynchronization-inventions-161049605.html.
Numerous patents issued. Ameranth’s inventions began to revolutionize the restaurant and hospitality industries. But years later, innovations that leading minds with keen understanding of the relevant science had lauded as pioneering technology were deemed by courts applying new standards of patent eligibility to be merely conventional and invalid.
The world of innovation and invention changed when the Federal Circuit started interpreting this Court’s §101 decisions, especially Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014).
Pioneering inventions that had been—and should have continued to be—protected by their duly issued patents became vulnerable to claims of invalidity. Scientific advances 5 praised as breakthroughs by the most knowledgeable people in their fields were now subject to losing patent protection as alleged mere abstractions. Often, that protection was lost. Too often.
INTRODUCTION:
Plaintiff Ameranth, Inc., respectfully requests reconsideration of the Court’s February 5, 2021 Order Granting in Part Defendants’ Second Renewed Motion to Declare Case Exceptional and Award Attorney Fees and Non-Taxable Costs (the
“Order”). This Motion is brought on the grounds that reconsideration is justified to correct multiple manifest errors of law and fact upon which the Order is based in order to prevent serious injustice, as discussed herein.
OVERVIEW:
An exceptional case determination must be made in consideration of “the totality of the circumstances ….” Octane Fitness, LLC v. ICON Health & Fitness,
Inc., 572 U.S. 545, 554 (2014). This encompasses considerations of both law and fact. The Order, however, is based on conclusions contrary to controlling law and overlooks or disregards material facts, meriting reconsideration.
‘Moreover, currently awaiting a decision from the Supreme Court on a petition for certiorari that may greatly alter the landscape of §101 challenges. As noted in a concurrence by Judge Moore on a motion to stay issuance of the mandate critical of the current state of §101 challenges, “Such a rejection of the plain language of the patent statute in favor of a vast and amorphous judicial exception in which we Federal Circuit judges get to decide de novo not just the legal principles, but the application of the science itself, cannot stand. American Axle has established a fair probability that the Supreme Court will reverse.” Am. Axle & Mfg., Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC, 977 F.3d 1379, 1383 (Fed. Cir. 2020).’
Wednesday, February 10, 2021
What’s Eligible for a Patent - The Section 101 Muddle Explained
"The court’s rulings on patent eligibility have become so diverse and unpredictable as to have a serious effect on the innovation incentive in all fields of technology. The victim is not only this inventor of this now-copied improvement in driveshafts for automotive vehicles; the victims are the national interest in an innovative industrial economy, and the public interest in the fruits of technological advance . . . . It is essential to restore the incentive role of the system of patents, for technology is the foundation of the nation’s economy, trade, and strength. Axle III, 966 F.3d at 1357 (Newman, J., dissenting). Judge Newman’s concerns mirror those of stakeholders throughout the innovation economy, and highlight the importance of this Court granting certiorari in order to clarify the scope of patent eligible subject matter and correct the Federal Circuit’s further expansions and unpredictability in this regard."
Thursday, February 4, 2021
ORDER GRANTING EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE MOTION FOR ENTRY OF DEFAULT JUDGMENT PURSUANT TO FED. R. CIV. PROC. 55(b)(2) AND CIVIL LOCAL RULE 55.1
“The deep divide in the Federal Circuit over how to properly apply this Court’s patent eligibility test and that court’s plea for guidance demonstrate that this issue will not be resolved without direct intervention by this Court. Accordingly, the amici curiae urge this Court to grant American Axle’s petition for a writ of certiorari.”
“II. The Federal Circuit’s Misapplication of the Alice/ Mayo Framework Would Render Invalid Patents that have Stood as Pillars of Technological Innovation
A. Bell’s Telegraphy Patent would have been Considered Invalid under Recent Federal Circuit Application of § 101.
B. Edison’s Light Bulb Patent would have been Considered Invalid Under Recent Federal Circuit Application of § 101.”
Monday, February 1, 2021
Ameranth - Splickit - 46 - REQ FOR EXT TO FILE MTN FOR DEFAULT
American Axle, SC Amicus BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE ALLIANCE OF US STARTUPS AND INVENTORS
"The Alliance of U.S. Startups and Inventors for Jobs (“USIJ”) submits this brief as amicus curiae pursuant to Rule 37 in support of the Petition for Writ of Certiorari by American Axle & Manufacturing, Inc., et. al., seeking this Court’s clarification as to what was intended in its Mayo and Alice decisions. The decision of the Federal Circuit in the instant case, if left unaddressed by this Court, will add further confusion to a body of jurisprudence that already has proven to be difficult if not wholly impenetrable for courts to apply with any rationality, predictability or consistency. It is crucially important that this Court grant the petition and review the decision and opinion of the panel majority below."
Iancu Resigns As USPTO Director, Urges Eligibility Reform
"We know that this issue is solvable," Iancu said. "We have shown the path, or a path, here at the USPTO. The most important technologies of the future are being impacted, including diagnostics, bioinformatics, artificial intelligence, digital processing and many more. We must resolve this issue, and we must resolve it now. If not, we risk our nation being left behind as others fortify their IP laws and race toward technological dominance."
American Axle Supreme Court Appeal {As To Similar '101 Issues To Ameranth}, filed And: Hoped To Lead To A Supreme Court Correction of '101 Law Flaws By Summer 2021- (Ameranth Will Soon File Supporting Amicus Brief)
Ameranth Files Patent Application 17/086,181 With the USPTO For the First Of Its Planned New Family Of Patents "An Intelligent Web Server With Multi-modes of contact, Multi-communications protocols, Multi-user And Parallel Operational Capabilities For Use In A Hospitality Market." Anticipated Patent Term Coverage Through 2026+.
"Dozens of Patent Claims Remain Valid Across Ameranth's Three '077,'060,'651 patents; a Fourth Patent Allowance With 20 Additional Claims is Expected Soon And A Fifth Patent For Late 2021 Is Also Expected."
Even Just A Single Infringed Claim Leads To Major Patentee Trial Victory
‘Ameranth Inc. Initiates Enforcement Of The ‘IAA Innovations’ - (Disclosed/Claimed In Its Latest ‘651 Patent), against OLO Inc. And Its 100,000+ Restaurant Customer Integrations.’
'US Supreme Court, To Review Two Additional Pending Appeals - (Based Upon the Confusion with '101 Patent Law'), to decide, In Conference - to determine, which, if any to accept -- with Rulings Expected by Oct 2020.'
Thursday, March 19, 2020
US Supreme Court - Miscellaneous Order As to Impacts of COVID 19 Virus
'Supreme Court Denies, an additional '101 Appeal.'
Friday, February 21, 2020
'Hearing with Judge Sabraw in SDCA - To Determine The Schedule/Timeline for Moving Forward With Ameranth's 30 San Diego Patent Infringement Cases.' (Ruling expected mid March)
Friday, February 21, 2020
'US Supreme Court, To Review Two Additional Pending Appeals - (Based Upon the Confusion with '101 Patent Law'), to decide, In Conference - to determine, which, if any to accept during their 2019/2020 Term, -- with Rulings Expected NLT June 2020.'
Wednesday, February 19, 2020
Supreme Court Justices Asked Yet Again To Clarify Alice In $4M US Bank Suit
'US Supreme Court, To Review Three Additional Pending Appeals - (Based Upon the Confusion with '101 Patent Law'), to decide, In Conference - to determine, which, if any to accept during their 2019/2020 Term, -- with Rulings Expected NLT June 2020.'
Monday, January 20, 2020
Reflections on Denial of Cert in Athena Diagnostics
'US Supreme Court Expected to Announce Which Appeals That It Will Review And Rule On - (by May/June 2020) - To Resolve The Widely Acknowledged Problems And Confusion with '101 Patent Law'
Friday, January 10, 2020
'US Supreme Court, Reviews Six Already Pending Appeals - (Based Upon the Confusion with '101 Patent Law'), to decide, In Conference - which ones to accept during their 2019/2020 Term, -- with Rulings Expected NLT June 2020.'
Thursday, January 9, 2020
Medical testing sector awaits Supreme Court clarity on patents
"Ameranth still strongly believes in the merits of its petition and will be timely petitioning the Supreme Court to correct the errors and confusion from Section 101 law, which both the Federal Circuit itself and the U.S. solicitor general believe is urgently needed."
"6/18 claims of the '077 Patent, 23/23 claims of the '060 Patent and 11/11 of the '651 Patent Remain Valid."
Federal Circuit Denial of Ameranth's En Banc Petition
Ameranth Files Its Appeal to the Full FC En Banc Panel Of the Federal Circuit - (Similar Issues as to '101 errors/problems as in American Axle's En Banc Appeal)
Either The Supreme Court Or The Congress Is Expected to Correct the Flaws In The '101 Law by Next Spring And Thus Nullify, the Domino's-Ameranth Nov 1, 2019 FC Ruling.
Monday, November 25, 2019
Supreme Court Has 'No Work' To Do On Mayo, Clinic Says
- Ameranth Will Appeal The Partially Adverse FC '3-Judge' Panel Ruling to the Full En Banc FC Judges In December - With The En Banc Ruling Expected in March 2020
- If necessary; Ameranth Will Then Further Appeal to the US Supreme Court - To Overturn this Ruling Based upon the Widely Vilified '101 'Abstractness' Law.
- Three Judge FC Panel Ruled 12/18 '077 Claims To Be Allegedly Conventional And Thus 'Ineligible' - Despite acknowledging that Microsoft Deemed Ameranth's Inventions To Be 'Innovative' And 'Groundbreaking' At The Time Of The Invention, In 1999.
- 6/16 claims of the '077 Patent, 23/23 Claims of the '060 Patent and 11/11 of the'651 Patent Remain Valid
- All restaurant/hotel reservations - ‘travel aggregator’ and ‘event ticketing’ claims remain valid.
Tuesday, November 5, 2019
The Final Plea for 101 Sanity - Athena Amici Ask Supreme Court to Clean Up U.S. Patent Eligibility Mess
Federal Circuit Hears Oral Argument - Can Unasserted Claims Of A Patent Be Invalidated Under Section 101
"On appeal, Ameranth argued not only that the district court's decision was improperly decided on the merits, but also that the district court lacked subject matter jurisdiction to declare invalid any patent claims other than the five that were being asserted against Domino's at the time of the motion."
"As for the three claims that had only been asserted against Pizza Hut, after pointed questioning, Domino's counsel ultimately conceded that those three claims should not have been part of the district court's judgment."
Imagine being able to order your favorite foods…through any digital platform you want. Say2eat is making that a reality by syncing restaurants’ existing online ordering system to other platforms like Messenger, Slack, iMessage and more, so consumers can place orders easily. With the added chatbot, ordering food is not just easier for customers, but also increases engagement with the brand. As research has found that millennials prefer messaging as a way to communicate with businesses and brands, it is important for places like restaurants to meet these consumers where they are. Don’t be surprised to see more and more of your favorite restaurants hop on the chatbot train in the coming years!
Watch CEO & Co-Founder Li-ran Navon explain how it works:
https://www.say2eat.com/ http://embracethemachine.com/2018/03/25/say2eat/
Wednesday, October 2, 2019
Google-Olo partnership makes ordering as easy as a Google voice search
Momentum Toward An Ameranth '101 Appeal Victory Builds - Including a New FC Ruling Confirming That The 'Presumption of Validity' Applies And Which Can Only Be Overcome by 'Clear and Convincing' Evidence - (Standards Now Applicable To Ameranth's Pending Appeal)
Tuesday, June 25, 2019
Pharma, Tech Cos. Back Proposal To Expand Patent Eligibility
Pizza Hut/Quikorder Patent Infringement Trial starts 90 days from today in SDCA on September 4,
2018. Dominos Pizza/Papa John's Trials follow on October 1, 2018. Grubhub Trial
starts on December 3, 2018.
Thursday, May 10, 2018
May 10, 2018: Ameranth's 'Intelligent Automated Assistant' (IAA)
Technology Value Is Increasing
Wednesday, May 9, 2018
'Google's Duplex could make Assistant the most lifelike AI yet'.
Ameranth Defeats All Defendants Attempted-Perceived – 2016-2017 -‘Invalidity’ and
‘Non Infringement’ Defenses-Arguments, Infringement Trials Are Now Set to Initiate in September
2018.
Ameranth defeats Starbuck's latest CBM Petition attack against Ameranth's
`077 Patent. Yet again, every one of the `077 #18 claims have been confirmed entirely valid by the US
Patent Office.
Ameranth Files Its 2nd 'Motion for Summary Judgement' (MSJ) , against
IPDEV/QUIKORDER For Its Fraud and Inequitable Conduct In Obtaining the `449 Patent and Its Secret Copying
of Ameranth's `077 Patent Claims into its `449 Patent
Ameranth Files It's Reply Brief To The Opposition Brief of IPDEV As To Their
Inequitable Conduct/Fraud On The Patent Office - Court Hearing Set for 1:30 PM, On September 15, 2017 -
Unless Extended By The Court
'Ameranth Files Initial 'Motion for Summary Judgement' (MSJ) , against
IPDEV/QUIKORDER For Its Fraud and Inequitable Conduct In Obtaining the `739 Patent and Its Secret Copying
of Ameranth's `077 Patent Claims into its `449 Patent'
Ameranth Signs a New Patent License - for its Patented 21st Century
Communications™ Web/Wireless Data Synchronization Inventions
Wednesday, January 6, 2016
Ameranth Strongly Rebuts Starbuck's Latest Attempt To Invalidate Ameranth's Mobile Ordering
Patent/Inventions, (Which They Copied From Ameranth But Claim To Be Their Own 'Holy Grail'
Technology)
(Ruling Due This Summer - Along with Expected SDCA Infringement Cases
Restart)
