IP Law Daily, PATENT—S.D.N.Y.: Google wins dismissal of infringement suit over location-based reminders, (Sep 1, 2022)

By Kevin M. Finson, J.D.

Location-based reminder services using a smartphone GPS were not patentable because the claimed invention merely used conventional computer components to automate a process that humans already performed manually.

A patent claiming location-based reminder services for smartphones using GPS was invalid for being directed to an abstract idea without an inventive concept, the federal district court in New York City has held. The claimed invention merely automated a process that humans could and did perform manually (Mira Advanced Technology Systems,Inc. v. Google LLC, August 31, 2022, Carter, A.).

Mira Advanced Technology Systems, Inc. (Mira) was the owner of U.S. Patent No. 10,594,854 (the ’854 patent), which claimed a personal organizer for mobile devices with a location-based reminder function. Mira alleged that Google, LLC (Google) directly infringed the ’854 patent through its Google Keep app and induced infringement by end users providing the Google Keep app pre-installed on Android smartphones and making it available for download on the Google Play Store and Apple’s App Store. Google moved to dismiss on the ground that the ’854 patent was invalid for being directed at an abstract idea and for failure to meet the pleading standard for direct, indirect, or willful infringement. The court applied the two-step Alice test.

Abstract idea. Google argued that the ’854 patent was merely using conventional computer components to provide a reminder to a user at a particular location. The court held that this was merely automation, using computers, of a task which could previously have been performed by humans. There was no specific technical improvement, only the automation of the process of checking the location provided by the GPS on a user’s smartphone and inputting that data into the patented reminder app. This was an abstract idea.

Inventive concept. On step two of the Alice framework, Mira argued that its use of automation to reduce errors and make more convenient a process that users could previously perform themselves was an inventive concept that should render the claims patentable. The court held that it was established law that relying on computers to perform routine tasks more quickly or easily than a human could perform them was insufficient to render a claim patentable. The court granted Google’s motion to dismiss on invalidity grounds.

Because it found that the asserted patent was invalid, the court did not reach the arguments on infringement.

The case is No. 1:21-cv-07931-ALC.

Attorneys: Jundong Ma (JDM Patent Law PLLC) for Mira Advanced Technology Systems Inc. Andrew Vincent Trask (Williams & Connolly LLP) for Google LLC.

Companies: Mira Advanced Technology Systems Inc.; Google LLC

Cases: Patent NewYorkNews