- videocam Live Webinar with Live Q&A
- calendar_month April 14, 2026 @ 1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
- signal_cellular_alt Intermediate
- card_travel Patent
- schedule 90 minutes
Step One of the Alice Framework: Recent Federal Circuit Guidance Provides Clarity and Confusion
Lessons From GoTV Streaming v. Netflix, PowerBlock Holdings v. iFit, and Trustees of Columbia Univ. v. Gen Digital
Welcome to BARBRI, the trusted global leader in legal education. Continue to access the same expert-led Strafford CLE and CPE webinars you know and value. Plus, explore professional skills courses and more.
About the Course
Introduction
This CLE webinar will guide patent attorneys on the lessons from the recent GoTV Streaming v. Netflix decision for navigating the abstract idea analysis. The panel will offer best practices for applying recent court and USPTO guidance in defeating abstractness and defending patents from Section 101 challenges.
Description
In the Supreme Court's Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International decision, the Court left the contours of what exactly constitutes an "abstract idea" undefined, leaving lower courts and patent practitioners to struggle. Recently, the Federal Circuit has provided both clarity and confusion to the abstract-idea analysis. On the clarity side, in GoTV Streaming v. Netflix, the Federal Circuit elaborated on what makes a claim abstract, the role of functional claiming, and the difference between the two Alice steps. The court emphasized that the step-one inquiry often turns on identifying the claimed advance over the prior art. It identified three recurring categories of abstract ideas from prior cases: longstanding or fundamental human practices; data collection, manipulation, and display, particularly when claimed at a high level of generality; and claims using result-focused functional language, containing no specificity about how the purported invention achieves those results. The court also explained the line between what is and what is not an abstract idea.
On the confusion side, the Federal Circuit is apparently split as to whether conventionality is considered at step one. In PowerBlock Holdings v. iFit, the court cautioned parties and tribunals "not to conflate the separate novelty and obviousness inquiries … with the step one inquiry… ." But, in Trustees of Columbia Univ. v. Gen Digital, the court did consider conventionality at step one, stating "claims that recite something 'already routine and conventional' are not sufficient." Practitioners, therefore, need to be well prepared when arguing 35 U.S.C. § 101 in a forum that may end up at the Federal Circuit.
Listen as our authoritative panel of patent attorneys examines the Federal Circuit's recent decisions addressing abstract ideas and what the implications are for practitioners. The panel will offer best practices for applying recent court and USPTO guidance to assist counsel in defending patents from Section 101 challenges as well as in drafting patent applications to minimize the risk of a 101 challenge.
Presented By
Mr. Bahr specializes in all areas of patent practice. He previously served as the Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy at the USPTO. During Mr. Bahr's distinguished career at the USPTO, he was involved in nearly all patent-related rulemaking since 1995. His involvement in patent rulemaking includes the changes to implement the American Inventors Protection Act of 1999 and the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act. Mr. Bahr provided administrative oversight and direction for the activities of the Office of Petitions, Office of Patent Legal Administration, Office of Patent Quality Assurance, Central Reexamination Unit, and Manual of Patent Examining Procedure staff during his tenure at the USPTO.
Mr. Kiklis focuses on PTAB litigation as well as district court patent litigation. He also handles Federal Circuit appeals from his cases. With an extensive background in computer science, his technological focus is on software patent matters. Mr. Kiklis frequently handles high stakes matters, having been involved in several cases in which over $1 billion was at stake.
-
This 90-minute webinar is eligible in most states for 1.5 CLE credits.
-
Live Online
On Demand
Date + Time
- event
Tuesday, April 14, 2026
- schedule
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
I. GoTV Streaming v. Netflix (Fed. Cir. Feb. 9, 2026)
II. Is conventionality considered during the abstract-idea analysis?
III. Best practices for handling an abstract-idea argument
The panel will review these and other important issues:
- What subject matter has the Federal Circuit found constitutes an abstract idea?
- What to do if your claim contains this subject matter?
Unlimited access to premium CLE courses:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for attorneys and legal professionals
Unlimited access to premium CPE courses.:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for CPAs and tax professionals
Unlimited access to premium CLE, CPE, Professional Skills and Practice-Ready courses.:
- Annual access
- Available live and on-demand
- Best for legal, accounting, and tax professionals
Unlimited access to Professional Skills and Practice-Ready courses:
- Annual access
- Available on-demand
- Best for new attorneys
Related Courses
Step One of the Alice Framework: Recent Federal Circuit Guidance Provides Clarity and Confusion
Tuesday, April 14, 2026
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT
Advice of Counsel Defense in Patent Litigation and Protecting Attorney-Client Privilege
Thursday, April 16, 2026
1:00 p.m. ET./10:00 a.m. PT
EU Unitary Patent System and UPC: Recent Decisions and Developments
Tuesday, April 7, 2026
1:00 PM ET/10:00 AM PT