Contrary to Judge Taranto’s position, not only does the McRO claim not produce a physical improvement to a display (contrast In re Allapat), but as can be seen above a display is not even recited in the McRO claim. Judge Taranto’s position is as best an assertion that a physical display somehow works better because of the content displayed is subjectively more appealing. However, a colorized version of The Maltese Falcon does not improve the intrinsic qualities of a generic display. Similarly, the intrinsic qualities of a Kindle reader are not improved based on the quality of an author’s style of writing.
The post Judge Taranto, Meet Judge Taranto appeared first on IPWatchdog.com | Patents & Patent Law.
Recent Posts
- Life Sciences Masters Panelists Lament Mounting Policy Uncertainty
- Interveners Left Out in the Cold: EPO’s G 2/24 Tightens Rules for Late Parties to Patent Challenges
- Massie to Reintroduce RALIA in Bid to Abolish PTAB
- Reddit Dubs Perplexity AI and Data Scraping Companies ‘Would-Be Bank Robbers’
- CAFC Gives Centripetal Another Shot at PTAB in Case Tied to APJ’s Alleged Bias