Thank You For Submiting Feedback!
United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
October 19, 2020, Decided
[*926] Hughes, Circuit Judge.
Tenstreet appeals the Southern District of Indiana's determination that its patented method of using peer-to-peer networking to verify employment history is directed to patent-ineligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Because the district court correctly determined that the claims of the patent-in-suit are directed to an abstract idea and lack an inventive concept, we affirm.
For motions to dismiss under Rule 12(b)(6) of the Fed-eral Rules of Civil Procedure, we apply the law of the regional circuit. Bascom Glob. Internet Servs., Inc. v. AT&T Mobility LLC, 827 F.3d 1341, 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2016). The Seventh Circuit reviews a grant of a motion to dismiss de novo. Bible v. United Student Aid Funds, Inc., 799 F.3d 633, 639 (7th Cir. 2015). We review patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 de novo. OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc., 788 F.3d 1359, 1362 (Fed. Cir. 2015).
The Supreme Court has established a two-part test for determining patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int'l, 573 U.S. 208, 217-18, 134 S. Ct. 2347, 189 L. Ed. 2d 296 (2014). "We must first [**2] determine whether the claims at issue are directed to a patent-ineligible concept." Id. If they are, we "consider the elements of each claim both individually and 'as an ordered combination' to determine whether the additional elements 'transform the nature of the claim' into a patent-eligible application." Id. (quoting Mayo Collaborative Servs. v. Prometheus Labs., Inc., 566 U.S. 66, 78-79, 132 S. Ct. 1289, 182 L. Ed. 2d 321 (2012)).
Tenstreet owns U.S. Patent No. 8,145,575 (the '575 patent), which recites a method for using a peer-to-peer network to verify the employment history of job applicants, particularly for use in the truck driving industry, where such verification is required by regulation. Tenstreet argues that the '575 patent claims are patent eligible because they provide three advantages over conventional processes for employment verification: (1) a single channel for routing transmissions; (2) the ability for job applicants to monitor the verification process; and (3) database storage of employment history.
Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.
826 Fed. Appx. 925 *; 2020 U.S. App. LEXIS 33087 **; 2020 U.S.P.Q.2D (BNA) 11254; 2020 WL 6122801
TENSTREET, LLC, Plaintiff-Appellant v. DRIVERREACH, LLC, Defendant-Appellee
Notice: THIS DECISION WAS ISSUED AS UNPUBLISHED OR NONPRECEDENTIAL AND MAY NOT BE CITED AS PRECEDENT. PLEASE REFER TO FEDERAL RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE RULE 32.1 GOVERNING THE CITATION TO UNPUBLISHED OPINIONS.
Prior History: [**1] Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Indiana in No. 1:18-cv-03633-JRS-TAB, Judge James R. Sweeney II.
Tenstreet, LLC v. DriverReach, LLC, 417 F. Supp. 3d 1144, 2019 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 170134, 2019 WL 4832782 (S.D. Ind., Sept. 30, 2019)
patent, employment history, district court, subject matter, patent-ineligible, patent-eligible, verification, eligibility, correctly, motion to dismiss, computer network, abstract idea, job applicant, de novo, conventional, peer-to-peer, advantages, collecting, transform, network, recite, verify