An ex-employee of Ohio’s state disability office fell short in an appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court, with the justices opting not to revisit the noted Alice and Mayo rulings on patent eligibility. This decision underscores the challenges of challenging these patent rulings, continuing a running trend with appeals related to Alice and Mayo cases.
For background, the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International decision applies a two-part test for determining patent eligibility. Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, on the other hand, had set a precedent of denying patent rights to laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas. Both have proved significant and often contentious in the intellectual property legal landscape.
This case is yet another example of the high standard litigants must meet in order to overturn these well-established rulings. It signals that patent cases relying on an arguments against the Alice and Mayo rulings face an uphill battle in the U.S. Supreme Court.
Law360 provides further coverage of the specific details of the case and the implications moving forward for patent law professionals.