Can anyone point me to recent (post-Alice) successful examination responses to section 101 for computer implemented inventions (software patents). I am currently prosecuting a s101 objection for a computer implemented method and would be grateful if I could get some guidance based on some previous successful responses.
I attended an IP CLE conference last week and the following cases were discussed in relation to Alice.
- McRO, 837 F.3d 1299 (Fed. Cir. 2016)
- Amdocs, 841 F.3d 1288 (Fed. Cir. 2016)
- Trading Technologies, Inc., CAFC Appeal No. 16-1616 (non-precedential opinion that describes how 101 applies to GUI's)
- Thales Visonix, Inc., 850 F.3d 1343 (Fed. Cir. 2017)
- Visual Memory LLC, CAFC Appeal No. 16-2254
All of these cases appear to offer hope to overcoming Alice 101 rejections. A somewhat simple way of looking at this was related by a colleague at the conference: "if the invention improves the computer itself, then it is patentable; if the invention improves how you use the computer, then you may have 101 problems."