Two-Way Media Ltd., v. Comcast Cable Communications, LLC, et al., C.A. No. 14-1006 – RGA; 14-1212-RGA, August 15, 2016.
Andrews, J. Defendants’ motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted in part with respect to the asserted claims in four patents-in-suit and dismiss in part as moot with respect to the asserted claims of a fifth patent. Oral argument took place on October 29, 2015.
Defendants claim the patents-in-suit are patent ineligible pursuant to section 101, Alice and Mayo. Plaintiff contends that motion is premature because claim construction is needed. Defendants do not dispute that the court should consider plaintiff’s proposed constructions, but argue that they do not alter the analysis. The motion is not converted to a summary judgment motion where only the non-moving party has submitted evidentiary exhibits outside the pleadings. The disputed technology relates to a method of transmitting message packets over a communications network. The court finds that even if it accepts that the architecture described in the specification is designed to solve the technological problems of load, bottlenecking, and inadequate records, the claims do not recite the mechanism by which these problems are solved. They therefore do not supply the inventive concept. Another patent-in-suit likewise fail to disclose an inventive concept sufficient to render the claims patent eligible. The claims are directed to monitoring the delivery of real-time information to users, a concept the Federal Circuit has found to be abstract. Nothing in the claims requires anything other than conventional computer and network components operating according to their ordinary functions. The final patent is directed to a method for metering real-time streaming media for commercial purposes. Measuring the delivery of information is analogous to the abstract idea of collecting and analyzing information. No inventive concept is disclosed sufficient to render the claims patent eligible.