Search Team

Search by Last Name
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
 
 

Alice Tracker

Alice Banner

The Alice Tracker provides a single source for significant decisions in which the patent-eligibility of claims is addressed under Alice.  Our index of sampled cases is updated regularly, and can be filtered on various parameters. Although this page does not include every Alice-related decision, we strive to capture the most relevant and informative decisions, and post new decisions as they are published. Although Alice dealt with software, Alice was not about software per se. Instead, it was about the patent-eligibility of an invention encompassing an abstract idea, regardless of whether the abstract idea is implemented in software. Alice has changed the landscape for prosecutors and litigators alike. Since the decision, courts have struggled with identifying abstract ideas, as well as the “something more” required to meet part two of the test.

Name Date Court Category Abstract Idea Something More
MCRO, Inc. v. Bandai Namco Games America Inc., et. al. 9/13/2016 Fed. Cir. Organizing Human Behavior No N/A
Vanda Pharmaceuticals Inc. et al. v. Roxane Laboratories, Inc. 8/25/2016 D. Del. None Yes Yes
In the Matter of: Certain Activity Tracking Devices, Systems, and Components Thereof (Fitbit v. Jawbone) 8/9/2016 U.S.I.T.C. None Yes No
Core Wireless Licensing SARLl v. LG Electronics, Inc. et al 8/8/2016 E.D. Tex. None No N/A
Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom S.A. 8/1/2016 Fed. Cir. Organizing Human Activity Yes No
Bascom Global Internet Services, Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, AT&T Corp. 6/27/2016 Fed. Cir. Organizing Human Activity Yes Yes
Enfish, LLC v. Microsoft Corporation, et al. 5/12/2016 Fed. Cir. None No N/A
Avago Technologies General IP (Singapore) PTE Ltd. v. Asustek Computer, Inc., et al. 4/25/2016 N.D. Cal. None No N/A
Intellectual Ventures I LLC, v. Ricoh Americas Corporation and Ricoh Electronics, Inc. 3/22/2016 D. Del. None No Yes
Motorola Mobility, LLC. v. Intellectual Ventures I, LLC. 3/21/2016 PTAB None Yes No
Core Wireless Licensing v. LG Electronics, Inc. 3/20/2016 E.D. Tex. None No Yes
ContourMed Inc. v. American Breast Care L.P. 3/17/2016 S.D. Tex. None No N/A
A PTY LTD. v. eBay, Inc. 2/29/2016 W.D. Tex. Organizing Human Activity Yes No
Genband US LLC v. Metaswitch Networks Corp. et al. 1/6/2016 E.D. Tex. None No Yes
Motio, Inc. v. BSP Software LLC 1/4/2016 E.D. Tex. None No N/A
Motio, Inc v. BSP Software LLC, Brightstar Partners, Inc., and Avent, Inc. 1/4/2016 E.D. Tex. None Yes Yes
Vehicle Intelligence and Safety LLC v. Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC, Daimler AG 12/28/2015 Fed. Cir. None Yes No
Communique Laboratory, Inc. v. Citrix Systems, Inc. 12/21/2015 N.D. Ohio None No Yes
Collarity, Inc. v. Google Inc 11/25/2015 D. Del. Organizing Human Activity Yes No
Finjan Inc. v. Blue Coat Systems 11/20/2015 N.D. Cal. None No N/A
load more

What is Alice?

In Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 132 S. Ct. 1289 (2012), the Supreme Court articulated a two-part analytical framework for determining whether a claim is patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 (the “Mayo-test”). Mayo dealt with laws of nature and natural phenomena, two of the three judicial exceptions to patent-eligibility. In Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014), the Supreme Court applied the Mayo-test to abstract ideas, the third of the three judicial exceptions.

Read more

Resources


Stay current with Fish Sign up for our Newsletter