Devin Bays v. State of Indiana (mem. dec.)

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that the technology changed the manner of transmitting data which resulted in reduced response time
• explaining that the eligibility “in- quiry often turns on whether the claims focus on specific asserted improvements in computer capabilities or instead on a process or system that qualifies [as] an abstract idea for which computers are invoked merely as a tool”
• finding claims eligible that were directed to reducing the “latency experienced by parked secondary stations in communication systems” by adding “an additional data field for polling”
• finding as not directed to patent ineligible subject matter a claim directed to “a primary station for use in a communications system” because the claimed invention was directed to “the reduction of latency experienced by parked secondary stations in communication systems”
• “The claims at issue do not merely recite generalized steps to be performed on a computer using conventional computer activity.”
• an “improvement to computer functionality, namely the reduction of latency experienced by parked secondary stations in communication systems.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).