The PTAB held that all of the challenged claims of U.S. Patent No. 7,933,827 titled “Multi-parallel Architecture and Method of Using the Same,” are unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. Section 101. MIAX is represented in this proceeding by Christine M. Morgan, Lisa A. Chiarini, Eric Hutz, James C. Martin, Sidharth Kapoor and Amardeep Grewal of the Reed Smith’s IP, Tech & Data Practice. Lisa A. Chiarini, Christine M. Morgan and Sidharth Kapoor also represent MIAX in the related district court litigation.
“Today’s decision, coupled with the PTAB’s previous invalidations of every other patent Nasdaq asserted against MIAX, further strengthens MIAX’s right to operate its successful trading exchanges,” said Morgan. “These rulings may allow more entrepreneurial FinTech companies to enter the securities trading market and permit competition to flourish,” said Chiarini.
Morgan argued before the PTAB in July that the claims of the ’827 patent are invalid under the 2014 U.S. Supreme Court decision Alice Corp v. CLS Bank, which held that claims directed to an abstract idea are not patentable under Section 101 of the U.S. Patent Code. Based on the Alice precedent, MIAX asserted that Nasdaq’s patent claims, as with those in Nasdaq’s ’051 Patent previously invalidated by the PTAB, merely recite routing information to a particular destination using generic computer technology. The PTAB agreed with MIAX that under Alice, such processes are not patent-eligible. Previously, the PTAB had accepted Chiarini’s successful argument that Nasdaq’s ’506 Patent is invalid because it merely claims the abstract idea of monitoring the availability of a primary recipient using well-known, conventional technology.