Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on LinkedIn
By J.D. Houvener
Patent Attorney and Founder

Hi everyone, I’m J.D. Houvener, your host of the Bold Today’s Show where you, the adventurer, entrepreneur, or business owner, get your daily dose of inspiration to make the world a better place. I’m so glad you made it here, thank you for joining, and happy Friday to all those listeners. I’m excited to continue; this is our last session talking about software patents and how they’ve been changing the world lately. They are by far and away the most prevalent applications that are getting filed today, and it’s pertinent that you know as an inventor, you know as a business owner, someone that’s moving the ball forward, how software implant impacts intellectual property in your business today.

So, in this last section, we’re going to talk about a very interesting case that was decided in 2018, yeah, this year, put down by the sea of the Supreme Court. This is Atrix Software versus Green Shades Software. This decision is going to be groundbreaking, as we’ve discussed how a lot of the decisions that have come down lately about software for the past several years have been invalidating them right after the big CLS Bank and Alice case. Those cases said, “luckily, this patent is not eligible and is no longer allowed in the system, is not going to be something that the government is going to enforce as a valid patent against anyone infringing those claims, which are no longer valid because it’s akin to an abstract idea. What’s being claimed is so abstract and amorphous that it’s hard to pin down or not going to enforce it.”

What this says is that that very first evaluation before they see whether the claims are being infringed or not, they do this assessment, as we’ve been talking about, to see whether it is an abstract idea. And up until now, until early this year, 2018, the judges have been making this decision as a matter of law. What that means is that the jury doesn’t get to say that there’s very little evidence, and the Federal Rules of Procedure of Civil Procedure, the rule is 12 B 6, and this is a motion to dismiss. This is Sigma. These people don’t even have to think enough in case this based on our allegations. You, judge, should be able to make a ruling on this case without even looking at the evidence, without opening it up to a juror. And the courts, just this year, said, “you know what, this decision on patent eligibility is a matter of fact.”

And when it’s a matter of fact versus a matter of law, that’s a huge difference because no longer can the judge make a decision because they need to look at the facts. And the fact-finder, usually, if it goes to trial, would be at the request of the decision by the jury about a set of facts. So, it’s going to be a big win for inventors and those that have patent rights to not have to get squashed before they actually get their fair day in court.

This has been a fun series for you about learning about software and how it impacts your life and your business. Please give us a call or put a comment below about what it means to you about this decision and all the other cases that we mentioned this week. And of course, give us a call or go to our email info at bold IP dot com, go for our website at bold patents dot com. We would be happy to talk with you. I’m your host J.D. Houvener of the Bold Today Show, and everyone have a great weekend. Go big, go bold.

About the Author
J.D. Houvener is a Registered USPTO Patent Attorney who has a strong interest in helping entrepreneurs and businesses thrive. J.D. leverages his technical background in engineering and experience in the aerospace industry to provide businesses with a unique perspective on their patent needs. He works with clients who are serious about investing in their intellectual assets and provides counsel on how to capitalize their patents in the market. If you have any questions regarding this article or patents in general, consider contacting J.D. at