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 2026

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

Cookies Settings

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

Camilla Hamrin describes how the acquisition by Acapo Onsagers will impact Bergenstråhle’s trademark practice – and reflects on changes she has seen over 30 years in IP
On a recent trip to the French capital, we learned that the UPC is squeezing domestic litigation while firms are chasing senior talent, experimenting with AI and considering new ways of organising their practices
Daniel Law says a string of lateral hires and broader expansion plans will strengthen its position to capitalise on Brazil’s burgeoning IP and patent litigation market
Jason Raeburn’s arrival will expand the firm’s London footprint in AI, copyright and tech disputes
The firm is shaping its AI strategy around partnerships with Harvey and Legora alongside internally developed tools from its legal technology company, Eltemate
A dispute Down Under shows why trademark lawyers cannot afford to wait on the sidelines when a rival brand gathers momentum
The Third Circuit’s decision in Thomson Reuters v ROSS marks the first appellate-level decision addressing AI and fair use, prompting copyright counsel to consider arguments around potential licensing markets
Injunctions for HandsFree Labs and Align Technology come as the Court of Appeal warns that busy teams must have the staffing and resources to meet UPC deadlines
The chief technology officer remit, which has been created as the firm is building its litigation team, will include expanding the use of AI in patent and legal work and automating manual processes
Former Hoyng Rokh Moneiger partner Laura Alonso, who brought her team to ECIJA in March, discusses plans to expand further and why ECIJA’s ‘IP DNA’ is helping broaden her work
Gift this article