Software patents are invalidated under Bilski
Accenture Global Services, GmbH and Accenture, LLP v. Guidewire Software, Inc., Civ. No. 07-826-SLR, May 31, 2011.
Robinson, J. Patents are held invalid as directed to abstract ideas; motion for clarification, reargument, and/or certification is granted as to clarification and denied in all other respects; and motion to strike portions of reply brief is denied as moot.
Accenture initiated this patent infringement and state law tort action against Guidewire on December 18, 2007. The patents-in-suit are directed to a computer program for developing component-based software capable of performing tasks relating to insurance transactions, such as claim processing. Guidewire filed supplemental briefing in support of partial summary judgment of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101, asserting that the patents-in-suit fail under Bilski. The court, which had previously determined that the claims failed the machine-or-transformation test, reasoned further that they also failed to satisfy § 101 under the broader standard adopted by the Supreme Court in Bilski. Guidewire alleged no change in controlling law, offered no new evidence, and did not show clear error of law or fact to support a reargument of its previously denied summary judgment motion of invalidity for indefiniteness or the on-sale bar and a disagreement over claim construction did not support Guidewire’s requests for interlocutory appeal. However, the court clarified its claim construction that one of the patents-in-suit did not contain a Markush group. Accenture’s motion to strike portions of a reply brief was denied, without comment, as moot.
