Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Impact Engine, Inc. v. Google LLC
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, No. 2022-2291 · judgment July 3, 2024
Before the decision, about 1.8× the 4.1% base rate. The model weighted this up for a circuit split argued in the petition, a dissent in the court below (flagged in the petition), and a Federal Circuit decision below, and down for a business respondent.
Questions presented
Section 101 of the Patent Act provides that “any new and useful process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter” is eligible for a patent. This Court has added a judicial exception that excludes “laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas.” Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 217 (2014). The Federal Circuit held Impact Engine’s patent claims for dynamically creating and distributing online ads are an unpatentable abstract idea. A different provision of the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C. § 112(f), authorizes a patent to claim “a specified function without the recital of structure,” in which case the claim must “be construed to cover the corresponding structure” in the specification. When considering whether a subset of Impact Engine’s claims written in § 112(f) form are patent-eligible, the Federal Circuit analyzed the function without considering the structure. That analysis all but assured the claims will be viewed as abstract. The questions presented are:
-
Whether the lodestar for determining patent eligibility under this Court’s two-step framework is whether the patent claims preempt basic technological or scientific building blocks.
-
Whether, when a court is determining if an invention claimed in purely functional terms under § 112(f) is patent-eligible under § 101, it must consider not just the functional claim language but also the specific corresponding structure defining the patent claim’s scope under § 112(f).
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Jason Michael Wilcox
Kirkland & Ellis LLP
For respondent
Andrew Thomas Dufresne
Perkins Coie LLP
Proceedings
- Mar 03 2025Petition DENIED.
- Feb 12 2025DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 2/28/2025.
- Feb 10 2025Waiver of right of respondent Google LLC to respond filed.
- Feb 03 2025Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due March 7, 2025)
- Nov 21 2024Application (24A485) granted by The Chief Justice extending the time to file until February 3, 2025.
- Nov 13 2024Application (24A485) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from December 5, 2024 to February 3, 2025, submitted to The Chief Justice.