{"id":2187,"date":"2018-08-15T15:32:12","date_gmt":"2018-08-15T19:32:12","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2187"},"modified":"2018-09-03T18:21:46","modified_gmt":"2018-09-03T22:21:46","slug":"doing-new-and-useful-things-still-isnt-enough-to-meet-35-usc-%c2%a7101","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/?p=2187","title":{"rendered":"Doing New and Useful Things Still Isn’t Enough to Meet 35 USC \u00a7101"},"content":{"rendered":"

In BSG Tech LLC\u00a0v.\u00a0Buyseasons, Inc.<\/a>, [2017-1980](August 15, 2018), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of an action for infringement of U.S. Patent\u00a0Nos. 6,035,294, 6,243,699, and 6,195,652,\u00a0directed to a\u00a0\u201cself-evolving generic index\u201d for organizing information\u00a0stored in a database, as being directed to ineligible under 35 USC \u00a7101.<\/p>\n

The Federal Circuit agreed with the district court that the asserted\u00a0claims were directed to the abstract idea of considering\u00a0historical usage information while inputting data.\u00a0 The claims’\u00a0\u201cfocus\u201d is guiding database users by presenting summary\u00a0comparison information to users before they input data.\u00a0 This is not a method \u201cnecessarily\u00a0rooted in computer technology in order to overcome a\u00a0problem specifically arising in the realm of\u201d wide access\u00a0databases.\u00a0 It amounts to having\u00a0users consider previous item descriptions before they\u00a0describe items to achieve more consistent item descriptions.\u00a0Whether labeled as a fundamental, long-prevalent\u00a0practice or a well-established method of organizing activity,\u00a0this qualifies as an abstract idea.<\/p>\n

The Federal Circuit rejected BSG’s arguments for patentability.\u00a0\u00a0First, BSG Tech argued that the\u00a0claims require a specific database structure, but\u00a0claims are\u00a0not saved from abstraction merely because they recite\u00a0components more specific than a generic computer.\u00a0\u00a0Second, BSG Tech argued that the claims\u00a0are not directed to an abstract idea because they require\u00a0users to specifically consider \u201csummary comparison usage
\ninformation\u201d rather than any type of historical usage information, but this was not persuasive, because of the broad meaning of “summary comparison.”\u00a0\u00a0Third, BSG Tech insists that its claims focus on a\u00a0non-abstract improvement in database functionality.\u00a0 Ultimately the Federal Circuit found that\u00a0these benefits, however, are not improvements to\u00a0database functionality.<\/p>\n

Having determined that the claims are directed to an abstract idea, the Federal Circuit proceeded on to step 2 of the Alice analysis, where it found that the only alleged unconventional feature of the claims\u00a0is the requirement that users are guided by
\nsummary comparison usage information or relative historical\u00a0usage information — which simply restates what had already been determined was an abstract idea.<\/p>\n

The Federal Circuit\u00a0affirmed the district court\u2019s\u00a0grant of summary judgment that all asserted claims on\u00a0appeal are ineligible under \u00a7 101.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

In BSG Tech LLC\u00a0v.\u00a0Buyseasons, Inc., [2017-1980](August 15, 2018), the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of an action for infringement of U.S. Patent\u00a0Nos. 6,035,294, 6,243,699, and 6,195,652,\u00a0directed to a\u00a0\u201cself-evolving generic index\u201d for organizing information\u00a0stored in a database, as being directed to … Continue reading →<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[15],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-2187","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-15"],"post_mailing_queue_ids":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2187","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=2187"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2187\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2188,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2187\/revisions\/2188"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=2187"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=2187"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/patents.harnessip.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=2187"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}