Morris Reese v. Sprint Nextel Corporation et al, 2-13-cv-03811 (CACD April 9, 2018, Order) (Wright, USDJ)
Wednesday, April 11, 2018
Caller ID Patent Claims Invalid Under 35 U.S.C. § 101
The court granted defendants' motion to dismiss because the asserted claims of plaintiff’s caller ID patent encompassed unpatentable subject matter and found that the claims were directed toward an abstract idea. "Plaintiff disputes that the purpose of the Claims is abstract. According to Plaintiff, the purpose is 'to indicate to a subscriber to both call waiting and caller ID, who is already engaged in a call, using an audible tone signal, the existence of an incoming call from a third party whose directory telephone number has been flagged private.' Even accepting this purpose as stated by Plaintiff, the Court finds it to be directed to an abstract idea. That the claims involve functionality of known telecommunications equipment does not detract from this finding."