Electric Power Group is the Federal Circuit’s weapon of choice for 35 U.S.C. § 101.

Electric Power Group (EPG) continues to perhaps be the Federal Circuit’s weapon of choice (see my last post). Since April 30, the Federal Circuit has used EPG five times to kill patents.

On June 12, in two companion cases (USAA v. PNC), the Federal Circuit considered the patent eligibility of four patents dealing with depositing a check using a mobile device: one was designated non-precedential and the other precedential. Interestingly, all four patents were filed in either 2017 or 2018 and issued in either 2018 or 2019, but claim priority to 2006 via continuations. The district court held that the patents were not directed to an abstract idea. The Federal Circuit disagreed. In both cases, the Federal Circuit found that depositing a check using a mobile device was an abstract idea, relying on EPG (“We have previously held that claims directed to collecting information, analyzing information by ‘steps people go through in their minds, or by mathematical algorithms, without more,’ and presenting the results of collecting and analyzing information fall ‘within the realm of abstract ideas.’”) The Federal Circuit also found that the claims were drafted in a “result-oriented fashion.” At Alice step two, the Federal Circuit found no inventive concept because “computer-mediated implementation of routine or conventional activity is not enough to provide an inventive concept.” The Federal Circuit therefore struck down all the patents. It’s worth noting that some of the claims were very long. So, don’t be shy about challenging even very long claims under 35 U.S.C. § 101.