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

INTELLECTUAL VENTURES I, LLC v. CANON INC.

Representative Claim

  1. An image scanning method for a scanner, the method comprising the steps of:

determining a driving signal, a triggering signal, and a number of rotation steps according to a predetermined resolution, wherein a period TG of the triggering signal equals a period TM of the driving signal multiplied by the number of rotation steps N within the period TG ;

driving a motor by the driving signal;

outputting an image signal by the triggering signal; and

storing the image signal within the period of the triggering signal.

Posture:

Multiple Motions and cross-motions for Summary Judgment on various issues including patent ineligibility under 35 USC 101 of the ‘761 patent.

Abstract Idea: No

The asserted claims describe steps including determining the parameters (which meet a certain mathematical formula) and applying parameters to operate a scanner. The court concludes that such claims do not claim the mathematical formula nor do they seek to simply ‘implement‘ such a formula, therefore, the claims are not directed to an abstract idea.

Something More: Yes

For completeness, the court turns to step two of the Alice framework. … Focusing on the language of the claim, the first step involves determining the three parameters (which satisfy a mathematical equation) and then using such parameters to ‘drive a motor,” ‘output an image signal,” and ‘store the image signal.‘ Such limitations are of sufficient specificity and describe a particular method for a scanner, thereby disclosing an ‘inventive concept.‘

The pre-emption inquiry focuses on whether the patent ‘would risk disproportionately tying up the use of the underlying ideas.‘ Alice, 134 S.Ct. at 2354; Mayo, 132 S.Ct. at 1294. … The court concludes that the claimed solution is described with enough specificity to place meaningful boundaries on the inventive concept.