Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
PersonalWeb Technologies LLC v. Google LLC, et al.
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2020-1543, 2020-1553, 2020-1554 · judgment August 12, 2021
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
In Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208 (2014)—a case about the patentability of computerimplemented business methods—this Court confirmed that inventions “improv[ing] the functioning of the computer itself” or “effect[ing] an improvement in any other technology or technical field” remain patent-eligible. Id. at 225-226. Lower courts have not followed that instruction. Petitioner’s patents claim a novel computer file system that significantly improved fundamental computer networking operations—an improvement in a “technical field.” Yet the Federal Circuit, in a precedential decision, canceled Petitioner’s patents as being directed to a pure “abstract idea.” Petitioner is not alone. Since Alice, the Federal Circuit has found, as a matter of law and without any guiding principles, the vast majority of issued patents in the computing arts patent-ineligible. The list of inventions that the Federal Circuit has deemed categorically “abstract” has grown so large as to place a cloud of invalidity over all computer-based patents. Certiorari is needed to provide guiding principles for patent-eligibility in the computing arts, and to restore the critical incentive to innovate in this essential technological field. The question presented is: 1. How should courts determine whether a patent for a computer-implemented invention is patent-eligible because it “improve[s] the functioning of the computer itself” or “effect[s] an improvement in any other technology or technical field” under Alice?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Lawrence M. Hadley
Glaser Weil Fink Howard Avchen & Shapiro
For respondent
Dan L. Bagatell
Perkins Coie LLP
Case
Conference history
Distributed for 1 conference
Proceedings
- Apr 04 2022Petition DENIED.
- Mar 16 2022DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 4/1/2022.
- Feb 17 2022Waiver of right of respondents Dell Inc. and VMware, Inc. to respond filed.
- Feb 14 2022Waiver of right of respondent Facebook, Inc. to respond filed.
- Feb 14 2022Waiver of right of respondents Google LLC and YouTube, LLC to respond filed.
- Feb 03 2022Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 9, 2022)