Internet Patents Corporation v. Active Network, Inc.

How courts have described this case

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

• recognizing that finding the boundary between abstraction and patent-eligible 21 subject matter is “not always easy”
• noting that “[s]oftware can make non-abstract improvements to computer technology just as hardware improvements can, and sometimes the improvements can be accomplished through either route”
• noting that “some improvements in computer- related technology when appropriately claimed are undoubtedly not abstract, such as a chip architecture, an LED display, and the like
• stating that the eligibility analysis is “facilitated by considerations” of §§ 102 and 103
• explaining that courts “start by ascertaining the basic character of the subject matter”
• explaining that courts “start by ascertaining the basic character of the subject matter”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).