GATTI, SARAHANN v. SCHWAB, RODGER J.

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that “considering historical usage information while inputting data” was an abstract idea
• holding that considering 14 historical usage information while inputting data into a database is an abstract idea, even though 15 the type of database needed to perform the mechanism at issue was more specific than a generic 16 computer
• noting that the self-referential table in Enfish \enabled programmers to construct databases in new ways that required less modeling and configuring of various tables prior to launch\
• explaining that “a claim is not patent eligible merely because it applies an abstract idea in a narrow way”
• holding that the abstract idea cannot supply the inventive concept
• explaining that “an improvement to the information stored by a database is not equivalent to an improvement in the database’s function- ality”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).