Night Vision Patents Not Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101

The court denied defendant's motion to dismiss on the ground that plaintiff’s night vision patents encompassed unpatentable subject matter because the asserted claims were not directed toward an abstract idea. "At a high level, all four claims undoubtedly involve the idea of superimposition of images. But the Federal Circuit has admonished that just because the claims involve an abstract idea does not mean that they are directed to an abstract idea. . . . The patent claims minimize the manual recalibration by using the location comparison data to adjust how 'subsequent sensor-based locations are determined.'. . . Moreover, we are not persuaded by defendant’s argument that plaintiff’s claimed methods can be performed with just the human eye and a weapon scope. . . . Although the human brain is capable of matching images and evaluating differences, the . . . method claims recite a means of automatically and continuously performing the evaluation without the user needing to adjust the field of vision directly in front of her. . . . Because [plaintiff] did not stop at the concept of superimposition but instead provided a solution for achieving accuracy and consistency in image registration, plaintiff’s claims are not directed to an abstract idea."

Science Applications International Corporation v. USA, 1-17-cv-00825 (COFC January 19, 2018, Order) (Bruggink, CFCJ)