Claims to Method of Real Estate Investment are Invalid

The Federal Circuit affirmed the invalidity of claims to methods of creating real estate inventment instruments in Fort Properties, Inv. v. American Master Lease, LLC.

Claim 1 of U.S. Patent No. 6,292,788 recites:

A method of creating a real estate investment instrument adapted for performing tax-deferred exchanges comprising:

aggregating real property to form a real estate portfolio;

encumbering the property in the real estate portfolio with a master agreement; and

creating a plurality of deedshares by dividing title in the real estate portfolio into a plurality of tenant-in-common deeds of at least one predetermined denomination, each of the plurality of deedshares subject to a provision in the master agreement for reaggregating the plurality of tenant-in-common deeds after a specified interval.

The other claims were similar, although claim 32 included the additional limitation that the step of generating a plurality of deedshares was performed by a computer.

The court held these claims were directed to an abstract concept and that the claims were very similar to the claims at issue in Bilski

The court performed additional analysis of claims that include the requirement that certain steps be performed by a computer.  The court relied on CyberSource and several other precedents in holding these claims to also be invalid under § 101.  The broad and general limitation of “using a computer” does not “impose meaningful limits on the claim’s scope.”  The computer limitation is simply the addition of insignificant post-solution activity to method claims that are directed to an abstract concept.

Thus, all claims of the ’788 patent are invalid as not directed to patentable subject matter.

About these ads

One Response to “Claims to Method of Real Estate Investment are Invalid”

  1. Hary Says:

    0There shouldn’t be a rostwafe patent. Software is essentially a book written in a different language. It should have stayed within the realm of copyright protection and no further. This is more a case of which was done better; The Lord of the Rings (Apple) or A Song of Fire and Ice (Android). Both take their cues from The Once and Future King (Linux) and The Poetic Edda (Unix). In the end it is all language and while it can be copyrighted, any similarities need to be brushed off as unintentional or incidental and not a violation of intellectual property. If you didn’t create the language, you don’t get to own it. It doesn’t matter how well you write in it, you are just borrowing what someone else did before.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 55 other followers

%d bloggers like this: