Recent developments in patent litigation are providing powerful tools for financial institutions to invalidate patent claims at the outset of lawsuits. Recent decisions have invalidated patents relevant to the financial services industry on Section 101 grounds, while Section 112 continues to provide an additional means to reject claims.

These tools were both employed in recent decisions by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) relating to patents held by DataTreasury. These patents—which claim an automated system to manage and store captured electronic and paper transactions from various activities including banking and consumer applications—were a central motivation for the creation of the covered business method review in the America Invents Act. The PTAB held these patents invalid under both Section 101 and Section 112.

These decisions are priming a new round of Federal Circuit appeals that will call upon the court to resolve issues of considerable importance to financial services companies.

Please join Stephen Baskin and Dara Kurlancheek from our Intellectual Property practice, Paul Hughes from our Supreme Court & Appellate group, and moderator Andrew Pincus also from our Supreme Court & Appellate group as they analyze and discuss:

  • The history of the DataTreasury cases and the impact of the recent decision invalidating those patents on the financial services industry
  • Other recent decisions that impact the financial services industry
  • The Covered Business Method process and how it has impacted patent litigation for financial services companies
  • The important new stages of litigation that are forthcoming in the Federal Circuit, including questions regarding the role of prior art in Section 101 challenges

Webinar Access
Instructions for accessing the program will be sent prior to the event.

For additional information, please contact Jeremy Fegley at jfegley@mayerbrown.com or +1 202 263 3019.