{"id":10646,"date":"2019-10-02T16:24:32","date_gmt":"2019-10-02T22:24:32","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=10646"},"modified":"2019-10-02T16:57:56","modified_gmt":"2019-10-02T22:57:56","slug":"judicial-notice-of-abstract-ideas","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=10646","title":{"rendered":"Judicial notice of abstract ideas"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

The oral argument prior to the Federal Circuit’s decision in IN RE WHITE<\/em>, No. 2018-1242 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 16, 2019) had an interesting sound bite. The case is a trademark case in which the Appellant asked the Federal Circuit to take judicial notice of the teaching of American history in public schools. Judge Wallach asked the Appellant if there was some source upon which the court could base such a taking of judicial notice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

It is interesting to note the care of the court when judicial notice is requested explicitly. Compare that situation to the court’s frequent pronouncements of abstract ideas (without evidentiary support) in step 1 of the Alice <\/em>analysis under 35 U.S.C. \u00a7101. Some would argue that a court’s pronouncement of something being an abstract idea is a taking of judicial notice. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

You can listen to Judge Wallach’s comment from In re White<\/em> here:<\/p>\n\n\n\n

<\/p>\n\n\n\n