Magistrate Judge Recommends Granting-in-Part Defendants’ Motion for Invalidity Based on Lack of Patentable Subject Matter

February 1, 2016 – On January 28, 2016, Magistrate Judge Nina Y. Wang recommended that a District of Colorado District Court grant-in-part and deny-in-part Defendants Ultrathera Technologies, Inc. and Kevin Maher’s motion for judgment on the pleadings that U.S. Patent No. 6,800,062 (“the ’062 patent”) owned by Plaintiff Brain Synergy Institute (d/b/a Carrick Brain Centers) was invalid for lack of patentable subject matter.  The ’062 patent is titled “Comprehensive Vertigo Management” and is directed toward a vertigo management system and method for diagnosing and treating human disorders involving symptoms of dizziness, vertigo and imbalance.

Magistrate Judge Wang found that the independent asserted claim (claim 2) of the ’062 patent was invalid because it was directed to an abstract idea – “a method of using sensors to collect two different streams of data and transmitting them to a data processor, which is a generic computer, for processing.”  The court ruled that the claims were analogous to claims for data gathering and testing that other courts have consistently determined to be patent-ineligible abstract ideas.

However, the court recommended denying Defendants’ motion as it concerned the dependent claims.  Defendants’ argued that independent claim 2 was representative and the dependent claims should fall accordingly.  However the court ruled that “[t]he law provides that each claim of a patent (whether in independent, dependent, or multiple dependent form) is presumed valid independently of the validity of other claims; dependent claims are presumed valid even if dependent on an invalid claim” and that Defendants “failed to establish that claim 2 is an appropriate representative claim.”

The case is captioned Brain Synergy Institute LLC v. UltraThera Technologies, Inc.,1-13-cv-01471 and is pending in the District of Colorado.

By: Ketan V. Patel

View Attachment (PDF)