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

Freeny et al v. Murphy Oil Corporation et al.

Representative Claim

  1. An automated product pricing system, comprising:

a plurality of physical store systems, each of the physical store systems comprising:

a product pricing unit constructed to display a product location price indicating the unit price of a product;

a store checkout station constructed to request from a shopper a product checkout price for the purchase of the product;

a store system computer constructed to communicate with the product pricing unit and the store checkout station so as to automatically change the product location price and the product checkout price;

a control system computer adapted to selectively communicate price change codes indicate of different prices for the same product to the store system computer of each of the physical store systems whereby the price changes at the physical store systems for the product are capable of being individualized at each physical store system.

Posture:

Motion for Summary Judgment.

Abstract Idea: No

“The Court … finds the claims to be patent eligible under section 101. Patent claims enjoy a presumption of validity. 35 U.S.C. § 282. Beyond listing the claimed elements in a column entitled “Abstract Commercial Principle” (Mot. at 9–10), Defendant has failed to articulate convincingly why it believes the “automated product pricing system” of the Asserted Claims is considered abstract under the law. By evaluating Claim 24 of the ’071 Patent as a whole,3 the court concludes the Asserted Claims are not abstract under the law..”

“Specifically, Claim 24 is directed to physical systems for controlling the display and management of product prices in physical stores, utilizing specific types of electronic devices that are networked together to operate in a very specific manner. This system of interconnected physical devices—implemented in a specialized manner to control the display and management of product prices—stands in stark contrast to the recitation of a general computer performing generic computer functions in relation to an abstract concept (such as, for example, a scheme for mitigating settlement risk) as set forth in Alice. See Alice, 135 S. Ct. at 2359 (“In short, each step does no more than require a generic computer to perform generic computer functions.”).”