Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 07 DECEMBER 2022

No More Bites At The Apple To Satisfy Section 101

Morrison Foerster
Morrison Foerster
Contributor
Morrison Foerster

Morrison Foerster

With approximately 1,000 lawyers in 19 offices, Morrison & Foerster is a preeminent global law firm...

View firm profile
Explore more from Morrison Foerster

Ginegar LLC sued Slack Technologies, Inc. for infringing its patents involving instant messaging systems. Judge William H. Orrick previously dismissed Ginegar's claims for failure...

United StatesIntellectual Property

Ginegar LLC sued Slack Technologies, Inc. for infringing its patents involving instant messaging systems. Judge William H. Orrick previously dismissed Ginegar's claims for failure to satisfy Section 101 with leave to amend. Despite Ginegar's second bite at the complaint-drafting apple, Judge Orrick held that the claim at issue still fails to satisfy 35 U.S.C. §101 under the Mayo/Alice test. Judge Orrick thus dismissed Ginegar's infringement claim under Rule 12(b)(6) without leave to amend and entered judgment against Ginegar.

Abstract Idea. The claim at issue is directed to a system that allows participants in an instant messaging session to exchange both audio and text messages, and then logs a unified transcript of those messages. The court found that the claim recites an abstract idea of "combining different message types in a single transcript." Although Ginegar identified a purported improvement to instant messaging technology, i.e., "automatically creating a

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Morrison & Foerster LLP. All rights reserved

See more popular content from