- Microsoft successfully defended against Mastermine’s software patent covering pivot tables by showing the claim did not properly cover Microsoft’s product under a careful, layered claim interpretation.
- Craige identifies four distinct layers that must be considered to properly interpret a patent claim.
- Subtle distinctions within each of those four layers can make the difference between successful patent enforcement and a claim that comes close but ultimately falls short, as happened to Mastermine.
- The case also offers a rare look at “hybrid claiming” techniques, where courts consider specific factors before permitting both method and apparatus elements to be recited in the same claim, which can produce especially powerful software claims.
Summary: The 4 layers that must be considered to properly interpret a patent claim.
In this enlightening review of Microsoft’s successful non-infringement defense against Mastermine’s software patent relating to pivot tables, Craige exposes the 4 layers that must be considered to properly interpret a patent claim.
Craige provides crucial insights into the subtleties of each layer that make the difference between successful patent enforcement and just getting close but falling short, as Mastermine did with their claims.
As a bonus, Craige takes this case as a rare opportunity to explore hybrid claiming techniques, showing the factors that courts look at to decide when to permit both method and apparatus elements to be recited in the same claim – which can produce very powerful claims, for example, to protect software!
In the Special Software Series, Craige Thompson discusses recent software patent decisions. If you would like to know what works and what doesn’t work since the Alice decision we invite you to listen to the show. Check back for new additions to this series.
