Is there life in Ultramercial yet?

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Is there life in Ultramercial yet?

The long-running Ultramercial patent case may have some life left in it yet, with the filing this week of a Supreme Court petition

US Supreme Court

Ultramercial this week petitioned the Supreme Court for a writ of certiorari in its long-running patent case.

The company argues that the Federal Circuit is divided on the issue of Section 101 as a result of its rulings in Ultramercial v Hulu, which invalidated the patent in suit, and DDR Holding v Hotels.com, which found the patent in suit valid.

After twice finding the claims at issue in the Ultramercial case patent-eligible, the Federal Circuit in its November decision found them to be ineligible in light of Alice.

Ultramercial argues that any clarity brought to Section 101 jurisprudence after Alice has been shattered by the two Federal Circuit decisions. The company says that its claims are similar to those in DDR and thus the Federal Circuit is just as divided as it was before Alice.

It is unlikely the Supreme Court will take up the case, as suggested by a Patently-O blog post titled “Ultramercial Shoots for the Moon”.

However, as the Patent Docs blog noted, the consequences could be very big if it does.

“If the Court does review this case, software patentees may become uneasy,” wrote McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff associate Michael Borella on the Patent Docs blog. “For instance, the Court might decide that the claims of Ultramercial and DDR rise or fall together. As DDR is the only post-Alice § 101 case reviewed by the Federal Circuit that has found claims to be patent-eligible, it is a valuable data point for applicants and patentees. Losing this data point would deepen the mystery of what claims incorporating an abstract idea need to recite in order to be patentable.”

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Alston & Bird acted for InterDigital, while Samsung was represented by Fish & Richardson, during the arbitration process
Powell Gilbert lawyers reveal how they navigated parallel EPO proceedings and collaborated with European peers to come out on top in the Nordic-Baltic Division’s first judgment
The firms posted increases in revenue and profit per equity partner, with both giving a nod to their IP expertise
EasyGroup, the owner of the easyJet airline, said in a press release that UK-based first-instance judges are “less experienced”, bringing a long-running debate back to the fore
A cross-practice team from Mayer Brown, which included members of the firm’s IP practice, advised on the deal
María Cecilia Romoleroux discusses the challenges she has faced in her career in IP and how she hopes to improve things for the next generation of women
Value-added services give in-house counsel the satisfaction that they are getting more value for money, while law firms get the opportunity to win more work
A team at Boies Schiller Flexner is advising shoe company Kizik and parent company HandsFree Labs in the dispute
Nokia’s latest enforcement actions against Geely and Transsion joining Via LA’s AAC pool were also among the top talking points
Benjamin Kelly, the firm’s fifth IP partner hire in a little over one year, has experience in patent and trade secret disputes involving complex technologies
Gift this article