Patent Law - A computer program per se or algorithms not patentable unless it demonstrates technical advancement

Calcutta High Court Upholds Rejection of Google LLC's Patent Application, Court Affirms Non-Patentability of Algorithm-Based Method under Section 3(k) of Patents Act

In a significant ruling, the Calcutta High Court has upheld the decision of the Controller of Patents to reject a patent application filed by Google LLC for a method aimed at labelling visited locations based on contact information. The judgment, delivered by Justice Ravi Krishan Kapur, dismissed the appeal filed by Google LLC against the order dated July 3, 2020, which had rejected their patent application citing non-patentability under Section 3(k) of the Patents Act, 1970.

The patent application, filed in 2014, described a method intended to enhance location-tracking services by associating location labels with visited locations using contact information. Despite extensive submissions by Google, the High Court concurred with the Assistant Controller's finding that the invention was primarily an algorithm or computer program per se, lacking the necessary technical advancement or novel hardware integration to be considered patentable.

The court emphasized that the invention did not exhibit any technical effect beyond the normal interactions between software and hardware. It reiterated that the claims, characterized by functional steps like "collecting," "determining," "associating," and "outputting," were abstract in nature and did not suffice to establish a technical contribution.

Google LLC's contention that the method provided a technological solution to a real-world problem and enhanced computing device functionality was found unconvincing. The court noted that the claimed invention operated through conventional computing architecture and did not involve any novel technical implementation.

Citing precedents such as Ferid Allani v. Union of India and Microsoft Technology Licensing, LLC v. Assistant Controller of Patents, the court distinguished the present case from those where technical effects and innovative advantages were demonstrably beyond ordinary operations.

The judgment underscores the rigorous scrutiny applied to computer-related inventions under the Patents Act, reinforcing the exclusion of mathematical methods, business methods, and computer programs per se from patentability. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the Controller's order as adequately reasoned and consistent with patent law provisions.

Bottom Line:

Patent Law - A computer program per se or algorithms not patentable unless it demonstrates technical advancement or involves novel hardware beyond generic computing functions.

Statutory provision(s): Patents Act, 1970 Section 3(k), Section 117A

GOOGLE LLC (77/2020/PT/KOL) v. Controller of Patents, (Calcutta) : Law Finder Doc Id # 2765561