Professional Documents
Culture Documents
gov
Tel: 571-272-7822
Paper 12
Entered: January 13, 2015
DECISION
Denying Institution of Covered Business Method Patent Review
37 C.F.R. 42.208
1
This Decision addresses the same jurisdictional issue raised in all four
cases. The patents at issue in CBM2014-00149, CBM2014-00150,
CBM2014-00151, and CBM2014-00153 are all related, and the
jurisdictional arguments by Petitioners and Patent Owner are largely the
same in each case. Therefore, we issue one Decision to be entered in each
case.
I.
INTRODUCTION
Casee CBM2014-00149 (P
Patent 7,89
95,059 B2))
Casee CBM2014-00150 (P
Patent 8,45
57,988 B1))
Casee CBM2014-00151 (P
Patent 7,66
68,730 B2))
Casee CBM2014-00153 (P
Patent 8,58
89,182 B1))
Fig
gure 2A deepicts stepss for verify
ying insuraance coveraage or abiliity to pay.
Id. at
a 2:2224, 4:4561. The pharrmacy woorkflow inccludes veriification off
the prescribing
p
g physician
ns credentiials. Id. att 5:926, F
Fig. 2B (steeps 274
280)). Filling th
he prescrip
ption includes confirm
ming the ppatient has read
educcational maaterials reg
garding thee sensitive drug, conffirming thee patients
receiipt of the sensitive
s
drrug, and daaily cycle ccounting annd inventoory
recon
nciliation. Id. at 5:27
767. Step
ps 240, 2422, 246, andd 258266 of Figure
2C, are
a reprodu
uced below
w.
Casee CBM2014-00149 (P
Patent 7,89
95,059 B2))
Casee CBM2014-00150 (P
Patent 8,45
57,988 B1))
Casee CBM2014-00151 (P
Patent 7,66
68,730 B2))
Casee CBM2014-00153 (P
Patent 8,58
89,182 B1))
...
Figure
F
2C depicts
d
a portion of a prescriptiion fulfillm
ment flow ddiagram.
Id. at
a Fig. 2C. The CHiiPS system
m, referencced in steps 260 and 266, is an
application dattabase useed to mainttain a record of a clieent home innfusion
Xyrem is the brand name for gamma hydroxy butyrate, indicated for the
treatment of cataplexy (excessive daytime sleepiness) in narcoleptic patients.
Ex. 1001, 3:1419. Xyrem is a sensitive prescription drug prone to potential
abuse or diversion. Id.
7
ANALYSIS
A. AIA 18
Section 18 of the AIA governs the transitional program for covered
business method patent reviews. AIA 18(a)(1)(B) limits such reviews to
a person, or the persons real party in interest or privy, who has been sued
for infringement or charged with infringement of the patent at issue. As
indicated above, the parties both represent that Petitioner has been sued for
infringement of the 730 patent. Pet. 78; Paper 8, 23.
Section 18(a)(1)(E) states that a transitional proceeding may be
instituted only for a covered business method patent, which is a patent
that claims a method or corresponding apparatus for performing data
8
10
Casee CBM2014-00149 (P
Patent 7,89
95,059 B2))
Casee CBM2014-00150 (P
Patent 8,45
57,988 B1))
Casee CBM2014-00151 (P
Patent 7,66
68,730 B2))
Casee CBM2014-00153 (P
Patent 8,58
89,182 B1))
langu
uage as a whole.
w
Th
heir reasoniing is circuular [t]hhese claimeed steps aree
all fiinancially related
r
activities thatt are perforrmed dailyy by pharm
macies
becaause they provide
p
preescription drugs
d
to coonsumers (Ex. 1007 47; Pet.
222
23) and unpersuasiv
u
ve. We ag
gree with P
Patent Ownner; the act of
veriffying a patients insu
urance coveerage or abbility to payy is not a cclaimed
meth
hod step in
n the 730 patent.
p
Preelim. Resp. 2627.
Petitioneer confirms our analy
ysis with itts own diaggram that maps eachh
limittation of cllaim 1 to a representaative flow diagram sttep from thhe figures
of th
he 730 pattent. Pet. 5051. Peetitioner iddentifies thhe method ssteps
recitted in claim
m 1 as steps 1.1 to 1.8
8. Id. at 511. Petitionners diagraam, with
our notations
n
of
o correspo
onding figu
ure and stepp numberss in the righht-hand
marg
gin, is reprroduced below:
Ann
notated flow
w diagram of claim 11.
14
15
All citations in this subsection are to the papers and exhibits in CBM201400149.
20
All citations in this subsection are to the papers and exhibits in CBM201400150.
22
All citations in this subsection are to the papers and exhibits in CBM201400153.
23
III.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons given above, based on the present record and
particular facts of these cases, we are not persuaded that the information
presented in the Petition establishes that any claim in the 730, 059, 988,
and 182 patents qualifies as a covered business method patent under Section
18 of the AIA. Petitioner, therefore, has failed to satisfy the jurisdictional
requirements of Section 18.
IV.
ORDER
14
Amneal and Par further argue that, because a method step recited in
dependent claims 3, 10, and 21 (wherein a pharmacy enters data into the
single computer database) is to be performed by a pharmacy which itself
is a business, the claims are related to the practice, administration, or
management of a financial product or service. Pet. 13. That argument is
part and parcel of the used in commerce argument addressed in subsection
2.d., above.
24
kis
25