Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int'l
Supreme Court of the United States
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Thomas
The patents at issue in this case disclose a computer-implemented scheme for mitigating "settlement risk" ( i.e., the risk that *2352only one party to a financial transaction will pay what it owes) by using a third-party intermediary. The question presented is whether these claims are patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101, or are instead drawn to a patent-ineligible abstract idea. We hold that the claims at issue are drawn to the abstract idea of intermediated settlement, and that merely requiring generic computer implementation fails to transform that abstract idea into a patent-eligible…
Also in this document: Concurrence.
2Cases cited14 opinions
- United States v. Detroit Timber & Lumber Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1906
- Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 2012
- Bilski v. KapposSupreme Court of the United States · 2010
- Diamond v. DiehrSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Gottschalk v. BensonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Bascom Research, LLC v. Linkedin, Inc.District Court, N.D. California · 2015
- Joao Control & Monitoring Systems, LLC v. Telular Corp.District Court, N.D. Illinois · 2016
- Kroy IP Holdings, LLC v. Safeway, Inc.District Court, E.D. Texas · 2015
- Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp.District Court, N.D. California · 2015