In Trading Technologies v. GQG, the Federal Circuit addressed the patentability of software directed to a specific purpose. Trading Technologies owns patents for a computerized method and system for trading stocks, and other related goods. The method relies on improved software and user interface to facilitate stock transactions at a faster and more efficient pace. The system as a whole therefore decreases the time spent placing an electronic trade, thus increasing the user's chances of having orders filled at optimal prices and quantities. The lower court considered whether this system was patent eligible material within the meaning of statute and the Supreme Court’s opinion in Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. V. CLS Bank International.
In Alice, the court determined that a patent’s claim is not patent eligible material where it is “directed to” a patent-ineligible concept, (such as natural
phenomena or laws of nature) and the elements of the claim do not add enough to “transform the nature of the claim” into something patent eligible.
Partly because of the holding in Alice, the Federal Circuit has been hesitant to view software as patent eligible subject matter. However, in Trading
Technologies, the Federal Circuit noted that some types of “technologic modifications” to improve functioning of a system generally produce patent
eligible material. In particular, “for some computer-implemented methods, software may be essential to conduct the contemplated improvements.” Trading
Technologies’ system clearly improves the accuracy of trader transactions, albeit through software. Thus, because the claimed subject matter of the
patents is “directed to a specific improvement to the way computers operate,” the user interface method “imparts a specific functionality” in a program
designed to solve a specific problem, rendering it patent eligible subject matter.
As of January 18, 2017, when the case was decided, Trading Technologies Int’l v. GQG, Inc. was not a precedential decision. Given that this short case provides an affirmative example of software deemed to be patent eligible subject matter—certainly, a rare thing—those working with software patents or other disciplines frequently seen as directed to patent-ineligible concepts should make good use of this case’s persuasive weight.
The attorneys of McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. designed this blog as an informational and educational resource about intellectual property law for our clients, other attorneys, and the public as a whole. Our goal is to provide cutting-edge information about recent developments in intellectual property law, including relevant case law updates, proposed legislation, and intellectual property law in the news.
McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. provides this blog for general informational purposes only. By using this blog, you agree that the information on this blog does not constitute legal or other professional advice and no attorney-client or other relationship is created between you and McKee, Voorhees & Sease, P.L.C. Do not consider this blog to be a substitute for obtaining legal advice from a qualified, licensed attorney. While we try to revise this blog on a regular basis, it may not reflect the most current legal developments. We consciously refrain from expressing opinions on this blog and instead, offer it as a form of information and education, however if there appears an expression of opinion, realize that those views are indicative of the individual and not of the firm as a whole.
Your Worldwide IP Partner since 1924 ™