Patent Breakout IIB: Patenting Tomorrows Data Security Technology: - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Patent Breakout IIB: “Patenting Tomorrow’s Data Security Technology: Navigating the PTO in a Post-Alice Environment" Theodore Wood Parks Wood LLC 5 June 2015 By: T he o do re Wo o d Dr. Ma rc Da ndin 1

Ove r vie w • Curso ry Alic e Summa ry • Sub je c t Ma tte r E lig ib ility E xa mina tio n (De c 2014 PT O I nte rim Guida nc e ) • Po st-Alic e Pro se c utio n Stra te g ie s (E xa mine r T ips via in-pe rso n I nte rvie ws) • Po st-Alic e Applic a tio n Dra fting Stra te g ie s • Co nc lusio n 2

35 U.S.C. § 101 “Who e ve r inve nts o r disc o ve rs a ny ne w a nd use ful pr oc e ss , mac hine , manufac tur e , or c omposition of matte r , or any ne w and use ful e of , ma y o b ta in a pa te nt the re fo r, sub je c t to the impr ove me nt the r c o nditio ns a nd re q uire me nts o f this title .” 3

Alic e v. CL S Ba nk Summa ry Holding : Cla ims we re dra wn to a pate nt- ine ligible abstr ac t ide a a nd • no t e lig ib le fo r pa te nt pro te c tio n unde r 35 U.S.C. 101 Implic ations • Alic e e xte nds b e yo nd so ftwa re -re la te d o r b usine ss me tho d c a se s • Me re imple me nta tio n o f a c o nve ntio na l me tho d o n a c o mpute r is • no t pa te nt e lig ib le 4

Subje c t Ma tte r E lig ibility E xa mina tion Guida nc e (De c 2014 Inte rim Guida nc e ) 5

Subje c t Ma tte r E lig ibility E xa mina tion Guide line s (De c 2014 Inte rim Guida nc e ) P 1 : I s the c la im dire c te d to a pa te nt-e lig ib le c o nc e pt? i.e . is the c la im dire c te d ST E • to o ne o f a pro c e ss, ma c hine , ma nufa c ture , o r c o mpo sitio n o f ma tte r, o r a ny ne w a nd use ful impro ve me nt the re o f… (if YE S) 2-ste p pro c e ss unde r the Mayo fra me wo rk: P 2A: I s the c la im dire c te d to a judic ially r e c ognize d e xc e ption ? (I f YE S g o to 2B) ST E • P 2B: Do e s the c la im re c ite signific antly mor e tha n the judic ia lly re c o g nize d ST E • e xc e ptio n? (if YE S, c la im is e lig ib le ) 6

Judic ia lly Re c og nize d E xc e ptions 1) L a w o f Na ture 2) Na tura l Phe no me no n 3) Ab stra c t I de a a ) ma the ma tic a l fo rmula b ) he dg ing c ) o rg a nizing info rma tio n thro ug h ma the ma tic a l c o rre la tio ns d) c re a ting a c o ntra c tua l re la tio nship e ) o rg a nizing huma n a c tivitie s f) funda me nta l e c o no mic pra c tic e 7

Post- Alic e Prose c ution Stra te g ie s (E xa mine r T ips) Ste p 1: I de ntify (a lle g e d) a b stra c t ide a Ste p 2A: Arg ue witho ut a me ndme nt c laim not dir e c te d to judic ially r e c ognize d e xc e ption. Must sho w tha t wha t E xa mine r a lle g e s is a b stra c t ide a is no t a n ide a “in a nd o f itse lf” a nd he nc e no t a n a b stra c t ide a Ste p 2B: Arg ue with o r witho ut a me ndme nt c la im a dds signific antly mo r e to a lle g e d a b stra c t ide a 8

Post- Alic e Prose c ution Stra te g ie s (c ont.) • Co nduc t E xa mine r inte rvie w (mo re impo rta nt tha n e ve r) • Add struc tura l fe a ture s to c la ims, • I nc o rpo ra te no ve lty o f struc tura l fe a ture s into c la ims • Add ste ps tha t re c ite “tra nsfo rma tio n” o f da ta , inste a d o f me re re c e iving a nd se nding da ta 9

Post- Alic e Prose c ution Stra te g ie s (c ont.) • L imit use o f wo rds like “the inve ntio n c a n b e imple me nte d o n a c ompute r , a PDA , a c e ll phone or the like ” • I f the re ’ s o nly a 101 re je c tio n, ste p 2A c a n b e a rg ue d b y sub mitting tha t the ide a is no t a b stra c t (in c a se o f a funda me nta l e c o no mic pra c tic e ) sinc e it wa s fo und b y the Offic e to b e no n-o b vio us a nd no ve l. But… 10

“Signific antly Mor e ” • Sig nific a ntly mo re is not simply “mo re ” • T he c la ims must pro vide so me de g re e o f impro ve me nt to the c urre nt te c hno lo g y in o rde r to pa ss the “sig nific a ntly mo re ” b a r! • Applying judic ia l e xc e ptio n b y use o f a pa rtic ula r ma c hine • E ffe c ting tra nsfo rma tio n o f pa rtic ula r a rtic le to a diffe re nt sta te • Othe rs 11

Signific antly Mor e (c ont.) (Sa mple Re je c te d Cla im) 1. A me tho d, e xe c ute d b y a c o mpute r c o mprising a pro c e sso r, the me tho d c o mprising : re c e iving , b y the pro c e sso r, a n ima g e ; a pplying a filte r o n the ima g e to g e ne ra te a filte re d ima g e ; a nd se nding the filte re d ima g e to a se rve r. ac t ide a : “pro c e ssing / mo difying an imag e o n a c o mpute r.” T he abstr 12

Signific antly Mor e (c ont.) (Sa mple Ame nde d Cla im) 1. (Ame nde d) A me tho d, e xe c ute d b y a c o mpute r c o mprising a pro c e sso r, the me tho d c o mprising : re c e iving , b y the pro c e sso r, a n ima g e ; a pplying a filte r o n the ima g e to g e ne ra te a filte re d ima g e ; a nd g e ne ra ting a filte re d ima g e , the g e ne ra ting inc luding a pplying a filte r o n the ima g e b y e q ua lizing a n RGB histo g ra m o f the ima g e ; a nd se nding the filte re d ima g e to a se rve r. Caution : Ame ndme nt sho uld a mplify c o re inve ntive c onc e pt 13

Sa mple Arg ume nt • “E ve n a ssuming , arg ue ndo , tha t the c la im re c ite s a n a b stra c t ide a a s a lle g e d in the Offic e Ac tio n, the c la ims inc lude s sig nific a ntly more tha n the a lle g e d a b stra c t ide a . Na me ly, the c la im re c ite s ‘ a pplying a filte r o n the ima g e using a n RGB histo g ra m o f the ima g e .’ As suc h, the c la im is e lig ib le unde r 35 U.S.C. 101.” 14

Dr afting Alic e - ”r e sistant” Spe c ific ations • Cle a rly a nd re pe a te dly hig hlig ht c o re inve ntive c o nc e pt • T ra nsfo rm g e ne ra l purpo se c o mpute r syste m into spe c ia l purpo se c o mpute r • I de ntify p a rts o f the inve ntio n tha t c anno t b e pe rfo rme d witho ut a c o mpute r o r the disc lo se d a ppa ra tus 15

Ge ne ric Compute r Syste m 16

Non- g e ne ric Compute r Syste m 17

“Dra ft Complia nc e ” Cla im… Hypothe tic a l (E a rlie r Pre se nta tion) A me tho d fo r a n o rg a niza tio n ha ving multiple e xisting syste ms with we b inte rfa c e s fo r a c c e pting c a rd numb e rs to c o mply with the PCI da ta se c urity sta nda rd, the me tho d c o mprising : a ) e mb e dding , in the we b inte rfa c e s o f e a c h o f the e xisting syste ms, se c ure re dire c to r c o de fo r se nding c a rd numb e rs to a ne w site ; b ) whe n a use r sub mits a c a rd numb e r to a n e xisting syste m, the se c ure re dire c to r c o de se nding the c a rd numb e r to the ne w site a nd re c e iving a string o f ra ndo m numb e rs in re turn; c ) the e xisting syste m pro c e e ding with a tra nsa c tio n using the string o f ra ndo m numb e rs a s a re pla c e me nt fo r the c a rd numb e r; a nd d) a t the e nd o f the tra nsa c tio n, pro c e ssing pa yme nt b y using the string o f ra ndo m numb e rs a s a n inde x into a ta b le c o nta ining the c a rd numb e r. 18

Applic a tion of Subje c t Ma tte r E lig ibility Ana lysis to “Dra ft Complia nc e ” Cla im P 1 : I s the c la im dire c te d to a pa te nt-e lig ib le c o nc e pt? i.e . is the c la im dire c te d to ST E • o ne o f a pro c e ss, ma c hine , … ( YE S ) the Mayo fr k: 2- ste p pr oc e ss unde r ame wor P 2A: I s the c la im dire c te d to a judic ia lly re c o g nize d e xc e ptio n? ST E • Ye s . Ab stra c t ide a . • P 2B: Do e s c la im re c ite signific antly mor e tha n the judic ia lly re c o g nize d e xc e ptio n? ST E • No (simila r to Ultrame rc ial c a se – c ite d in De c 2014 PT O I nte rim Guida nc e ) • 19