{"id":4252,"date":"2011-07-26T00:24:51","date_gmt":"2011-07-26T06:24:51","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=4252"},"modified":"2011-07-26T00:24:51","modified_gmt":"2011-07-26T06:24:51","slug":"fuzzysharp-tech-v-3dlabs-part-2","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/?p=4252","title":{"rendered":"Fuzzysharp Tech. v. 3DLabs — Part 2"},"content":{"rendered":"

Another interesting aspect of the recent Fuzzysharp v. 3DLabs<\/span> oral argument was the attention paid to the\u00a0 Research Corp. Technologies v. Microsoft<\/span> case decided back in December 2010.\u00a0 In that case, Chief Judge Rader wrote for the court:<\/p>\n

\n

The invention presents functional and palpable applications in the field of computer technology<\/strong>. These inventions address \u201ca need in the art for a method of and apparatus for the halftone rendering of gray scale images in which a digital data processor is utilized in a simple and precise manner to accomplish the halftone render-ing.\u201d \u2019310 patent col.3 ll.33-40. The fact that some claims in the \u2019310 and \u2019228 patents require a \u201chigh contrast film,\u201d \u201ca film printer,\u201d \u201ca memory,\u201d and \u201cprinter and display devices\u201d also confirm this court\u2019s holding that the invention is not abstract. Indeed, this court notes that inventions with specific applications or improvements to technologies in the marketplace are not likely to be so abstract that they override the statutory language and framework of the Patent Act.<\/strong><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

This court also observes that the claimed methods incorporate algorithms and formulas that control the masks and halftoning. These algorithms and formulas, even though admittedly a significant part of the claimed combination, do not bring this invention even close to abstractness that would override the statutory categories and context. The Supreme Court has already made abundantly clear that inventions incorporating and relying upon even \u201ca well known mathematical equation\u201d do not lose eligibility because \u201cseveral steps of the process [use that] mathematical equation.\u201d Diehr<\/em>, 450 U.S. at 185. Indeed, the Supreme Court counseled: <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

In determining the eligibility of respondents\u2019 claimed process for patent protection under section 101, their claims must be considered as a whole. It is inappropriate to dissect the claims into old and new elements and then to ignore the presence of the old elements in the analysis. This is particularly true in a process claim because a new combination of steps may be patentable even though all the constituents of the combination were well known and in common use before the combination was made. <\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

\u00a0<\/span><\/span><\/em><\/p>\n

Id. <\/span><\/em>at 188.\u00a0 <\/span>Borrowing from the reasoning of the Supreme Court in Diehr, this court observes that the patentees here \u201cdo not seek to patent a mathematical formula. Instead, they seek patent protection for a process of\u201d halftoning in computer applications. Id. at 187. Moreover, because the inventions claimed in the \u2019310 and \u2019228 patents are directed to patent-eligible subject matter, the process claims at issue, which claim aspects and applica-tions of the same subject matter, are also patent-eligible.<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n

(emphasis added)<\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n

Refreshingly, Judges O’Malley and Reyna noted that Research Corp.<\/span> is precedent and therefore\u00a0must be followed.\u00a0 Judge O’Malley first commented:\u00a0[Listen<\/a>].\u00a0\u00a0 Indeed, she commented that\u00a0in view of Research Corp.<\/span>\u00a0abstract ideas are only\u00a0to be found in the most\u00a0rare of circumstances, essentially: [Listen<\/a>].\u00a0\u00a0\u00a0<\/p>\n

And, Judge Reyna later added this comment:\u00a0[Listen<\/a>].\u00a0<\/p>\n

It has already been more than six months since Research Corp.<\/span> was decided.\u00a0 The Federal Circuit has\u00a0noted that it is precedent that must be followed.\u00a0 Will the PTO’s\u00a0Subject Matter Eligibility\u00a0Guidelines committee follow suit with updated guidelines?<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Another interesting aspect of the recent Fuzzysharp v. 3DLabs oral argument was the attention paid to the\u00a0 Research Corp. Technologies v. Microsoft case decided back in December 2010.\u00a0 In that case, Chief Judge Rader wrote for the court: The invention presents functional and palpable applications in the field of computer technology. These inventions address \u201ca […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4252"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=4252"}],"version-history":[{"count":5,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4252\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":4261,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/4252\/revisions\/4261"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=4252"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=4252"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.717madisonplace.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=4252"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}