Federal Circuit Narrows Utility of Hooke’s Legislation, however Nonetheless Wields the Ineligibility Hammer

by Dennis Crouch

American Axle & Mfg. v. Neapco Holdings (Fed. Cir. July 31, 2020). 

After I talked with PTO Director Andrei Iancu a number of months in the past, he lamented that the Federal Circuit is now discovering the manufacturing of Truck Axles and operation of Storage Door Openers ineligible for patenting.  The Federal Circuit panel has rewritten its Axle resolution — now holding that American Axle’s asserted declare 1 could be eligible; Declare 22 stays ineligible.

The courtroom was evenly divided six-to-six on the en banc petition.  That meant the en banc petition is denied for lack of majority.  The minimal modifications made by Decide Dyk to his unique opinion have been simply sufficient to keep away from full rehearing. Nonetheless, half of the courtroom thought that the opinion went too far in increasing the ineligibility hammer.

I’ll submit this right here for now, however will observe up with extra later immediately.

Paperwork:

• En Banc Denial with 5 Separate Opinions. [AmericanAx En banc Denial].
• New Panel Choice penned by Decide Dyk and Joined by Decide Taranto; Decide Moore in dissent. [AmericanAx New Opinion].
• Authentic Panel Choice penned by Decide Dyk and Joined by Decide Taranto; Decide Moore in dissent. [AmericanAx Original Op].
• Crouch, Hey Mechanical Engineers: Your Patents are Also Ineligible, Patently-O (October 3, 2019).
• Crouch, Validity Goulash: Functional Claim Language, Patent Eligibility, and Pick-up Truck Drive Shafts, Patently-O (December 15, 2019).
• U.S. Patent 7,774,911.