Muniauction, Inc. v. Thomson Corp.

How courts have described this case

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

• concluding that claims which added a web browser to a prior art electronic sys- tem were obvious as a matter of law
• concluding that “[t]he record in this case demonstrates that adapting existing electronic processes to incorporate modern internet and web browser technology was similarly commonplace at the time the '099 patent application was filed”
• holding that “where the actions of multiple parties combine to perform every step of a claimed method, the claim is directly infringed only if one party exercises ‘control or direction’ over the entire process”
• concluding that “the incorporation of web browser func- tionality” did not establish non-obviousness
• holding it obvious to “apply[] the use of the Internet to existing electronic processes at a time when doing so was commonplace.”
• stating that the fact that an alleged infringer merely “controls access to its system and instructs [third parties] on its use is not sufficient to incur liability for direct infringement.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).