In order for a patent to be granted it needs to meet certain criteria. It
must be patentable, must be novel, must be useful, and must be
nonobvious. The plaintiffs patent was missing some of these
requirements. Her initial idea was very good but needed some work.
She failed to research other shopping platforms to see if they were
using similar processes. This resulted in her process not being novel
or nonobvious. It was not completely unique and its own idea it had
too much similarity to other patents.
The judge ruled that the patent is invalid and that the defendant
doesn't have to change his business practice. I think the judge made
the right call here since the patent was missing some of the critical
requirements. She just needs to change some of her ideas and make
them more unique and try again for the patent to be granted.
References
Kubasek, N. K., Browne, M. N., Herron, D. J., Dhooge, L. J., &
Barkacs, L. L. (2019). Dynamic Business Law. McGraw Hill .
