February 22, 2020

February 21, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

February 20, 2020

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Federal Circuit Invalidates Online Advertising Patent As Unpatentable Abstract Idea

On November 14, 2014, the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals issued its third ruling in the long-running patent infringement dispute between plaintiff Ultramercial and defendant Wildtangent. Ultramercial Inc., et al. v. Hulu, Inc., et al. (Fed. Cir. Nov. 14, 2014).  In a departure from its two prior rulings in the case, the Federal Circuit affirmed the Southern District of California’s 2010 dismissal of Ultramercial’s patent infringement suit for failure to claim statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101.  The case began when Ultramercial sued videogame company Wildtangent and two other defendants for alleged infringement of Ultramercial’s method patent for requiring internet users to watch advertisements in order to access copyrighted video content at no cost while the advertiser pays for the copyrighted content.  Wildtangent moved dismiss under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), arguing that the patent did not claim patent eligible subject matter.  The district court agreed and dismissed the case. The Federal Circuit reversed on appeal, but the Supreme Court vacated that decision and remanded for further consideration in light of its then-recent decision in Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. __, 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012). 

On remand, the Federal Circuit again reversed the district court, which prompted Wildtangent to file a second petition for certiorari.  While Wildtangent’s petition was pending, the Supreme Court issued its ruling in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. __, 134 S. Ct. 2870 (2014), that a claim directed toward a patent-ineligible abstract idea does not move into patent eligibility territory under §101 by “merely requir[ing] generic computer implementation.”  The Supreme Court once again vacated the Federal Circuit’s ruling in Ultramercial’s favor and remanded for further consideration in light of Alice Corp.

Back on remand for the second time, the Federal Circuit found that Ultramercial’s patent “describes only the abstract idea of showing an advertisement before delivering free content,” that is, “a method of using advertising as an exchange or currency.”  The court explained that the limitations of the patent do not transform the abstract idea into patent-eligible subject matter because “the claims simply instruct the practitioner to implement the abstract idea with routine, conventional activity.”  In affirming the district court’s dismissal, the Federal Circuit held that using the Internet to implement an abstract idea is not sufficient to save the patent and transform the idea into a patent eligible invention.

© 2020 Honigman Miller Schwartz and Cohn LLP

TRENDING LEGAL ANALYSIS


About this Author

William Berndt  Honigman Miller trade secrets false advertising trade secret law
Partner

 Mr. Berndt is a trial lawyer with substantial experience in state and federal courts across the country. He focuses his practice on trade secret and false advertising claims. He represents businesses and senior executives in disputes relating to noncompetition agreements, trademark and copyright, fraud, professional liability, internal investigations, and general business and commercial litigation. Mr. Berndt has first-chair experience in trials, arbitrations and other proceedings.

  • Litigates requests for emergency relief such as temporary...
312.701.9376
David L. De Bruin appellate attorney patent litigation USPTO Honigman Chicago
Of Counsel

Mr. De Bruin is a seasoned first-chair trial and appellate attorney. He concentrates his practice on patent litigation and related proceedings before the United States Patent and Trademark Office. Mr. De Bruin successfully argues legal issues, as well as explain the most complex technology to judges and juries.

  • Tries patent cases in a variety of venues before judges and juries and has successfully argued numerous patent cases before the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Represents clients in a wide array of technology ranging from mechanical and electrical devices to biological and chemical patents
  • Advises on non-patent business litigation, including securities fraud, RICO, insolvency and telecommunications fraud
  • Serves as an arbitrator deciding securities claims and IP insurance coverage issues
  • Provides submitted testimony as a Markman expert
312.701.9328
Marcus D. Fruchter lawyer Honigman Chicago office litigation specialist
Partner

Mr. Fruchter defends or initiates litigation when it is inevitable and avoids lawsuits where possible. He provides zealous and creative representation that protects his clients’ legal rights and advances their strategic objectives. Mr. Fruchter litigates in state and federal courts across the country, and he has handled matters involving international and cross-border issues.

  • Resolves disputes for clients in a variety of areas, including intellectual property, commercial fraud, securities investigations, contract interpretation and enforcement, and professional malpractice...
312.701.9354
Nicholas A. Gowen Honigman Chicago complex commercial litigation attorney t
Partner

Mr. Gowen represents companies, individuals and law firms in disputes, including those involving intellectual property, trade secrets, unfair competition, employment matters and other business litigation matters. He approaches litigation with an eye toward results; understanding that advancing his clients’ litigation strategies should fit within their overall business interests.

  • Counsels businesses on ways to avoid litigation and resolve disputes using alternative measures
  • Authors articles on various business litigation topics
312.701.9395
Steven A Weiss Litigation attorney Honigman Law firm Chicago ediscovery
Leader, Complex Commercial Litigation Practice Group

Mr. Weiss provides advice on a wide variety of business litigation for companies and business people. He is focused on resolving business disputes with particular experience handling intellectual property, breach of contract, trade secret, employment and covenant not to compete matters. Local and national companies and individuals retain Mr. Weiss to handle a full range of business disputes because they trust his judgment and litigation skills.

  • Provides cost-effective representation that achieves results - either through settlement...
312.701.9311