CALL US: 206.533.3854
CALL US  206.533.3854
By LG전자 - LG전자, 깜빡임 없는 55인치 3D OLED TV 공개, CC BY 2.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=17877860

Federal Circuit Revives Uniloc’s “Abstract” Patent

Claims aren’t too abstract
If patent solves a problem,
Says Federal Court

The Federal Circuit has revived a patent infringement case by Uniloc against LG Electronics, finding that the patent at issue wasn’t too “abstract” to be patent-eligible.

Claim 2 of the patent recites:

A primary station for use in a communications system comprising at least one secondary station, wherein means are provided

for broadcasting a series of inquiry messages, each in the form of a plurality of predetermined data fields arranged according to a first communications protocol, and

for adding to each inquiry message prior to transmission an additional data field for polling at least one secondary station.

The district court had held that the claims were patent-ineligible as “directed to the abstract idea of ‘additional polling in a wireless communication system,’” without a saving inventive concept.

But the Federal Circuit disagreed, finding that

the claimed invention changes the normal operation of the communication system itself to “overcome a problem specifically arising in the realm of computer networks.” In doing so, the claimed invention, like the improvement in computer memory we held patent eligible in Visual Memory, enables the communication system to accommodate additional devices, such as battery-operated secondary stations, without compromising performance.

Importantly, the claims were tied to a specific technical benefit – reducing latency.

As the court noted,

Our precedent is clear that software can make patent-eligible improvements to computer technology, and related claims are eligible as long as they are directed to non-abstract improvements to the functionality of a computer or network platform itself.

The case is Uniloc USA, Inc. v. LG Electronics USA, Inc.


Just like the haiku above, we like to keep our posts short and sweet. Hopefully, you found this bite-sized information helpful. If you would like more information, please do not hesitate to contact us here.

Related Articles

When is a patented product sold “within the United States”?

When is a product
“sold in the United States”?
It’s complicated.

Read More

Do AI content generators violate underlying IP rights?

IP owners sue
AI art generators.
What counts as “fair use”?

Read More

Patent Wars Come to Crypto

Veritaseum
Brings lawsuit against Circle
In patent dispute

Read More

Stay Informed

Sign up to receive Patent Poetry—a monthly roundup of key IP issues in our signature haiku format. Four articles (only 68 syllables); zero hassle.

SECTORS

HIGH
TECHNOLOGY

Artificial Intelligence

Blockchain & Cryptocurrency

Computer Technology & Software

Consumer Electronics

Electrical Devices

MECHANICAL
& PRODUCTS​

Cleantech

Mechanical Devices

Consumer & Retail Products

Hardware & Tools

Toys & Games

LIFE SCIENCES
& CHEMISTRY​

Biotechnology

Chemical Compounds

Digital Health

Healthcare Products

Pharmaceuticals

BRANDING
& CREATIVE​

Books & Publications

Brand Creation

Luxury Products

Photography & Video

Product Design