Navigation
In a precedential opinion, the CAFC, in IOENGINE, LLC v. Ingenico Inc., reversed PTAB's invalidation of claims related to portable data processing devices due to improper application of the Printed Matter Doctrine. Specifically, “Encrypted communications” and “program code” are not claimed for the content they are communicating, therefore they are not “printed matter” and the printed matter doctrine does not apply.
Exemplary claim:
Claim 2: Code . . . configured to cause a communication to be transmitted to the . . . node
Claim 4: Wherein the communication caused to be transmitted to the . . . node facilitates transmission of encrypted communications from the . . . node to the terminal.“
Holdings: