Bad Timing? Judge Defers § 101 Issue Until After Claim Construction

Order Denying Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings, Cave Consulting Group, Inc. v. Truven Health Analytics Inc., Case No. 15-cv-02177-SI (Judge Susan Illston)

It has been just over a year since Judge Illston last decided a motion asserting a patent is invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Last time, Judge Illston's order in in Bascom Research v. LinkedIn was part of an initial wave of post-Alice ND Cal decisions invalidating claims that covered abstract ideas. This time, the patent defendant didn't fare as well. Although Judge Illston had rejected Bascom's argument that claim construction was necessary, here she found that "claim construction will aid the Court's Section 101 analysis in a number of respects, including with regard to determining the scope of preemption and whether the claims contain an inventive concept." In a brief decision that barely discussed the patent at issue, Judge Illston denied Truven's motion "without prejudice to renewal after claim