Interval's Patent Suit Against the World Dismissed

randall77 writes with an update to a story we discussed in August about a patent infringement suit filed by Interval Licensing, a firm run by Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen, against many major tech companies over vague and broadly defined business methods. That patent suit has now been dismissed. Quoting Groklaw: "The court agreed with Google et al that it 'lacks adequate factual detail to satisfy the dictates of Twombly and Iqbal and also 'fails to provide sufficient factual detail as suggested by Form 18.' The court doesn't agree with Allen's Interval Licensing that the two cases do not apply to patent complaints, but it doesn't even need to go there: 'The Court does not find it necessary to determine whether Form 18 is no longer adequate under Twombly and Iqbal because Plaintiff's complaint fails to satisfy either the Supreme Court's interpretation of Rule 8 or Form 18.' Go Google. That was their argument in their motion to dismiss, along with AOL's. Google said the complaint was too vague to meet the standard under Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S. Ct. 1937 (2009) and Bell Atl. Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007). Then, after Interval Licensing brought up the lower patent form standard it thought should apply instead, AOL jumped in saying the complaint was too vague under even that standard, and the court agreed.

"Dictates of Twombly and Iqbal"

[Beryllium Sphere(tm)]

That would make a kick-ass title for something, I don't know what.

Re:"Dictates of Twombly and Iqbal"

[Bieeanda]

"The Dictates of Twombly and Iqbal: A Curiously Victorian Guide to Jihad" (Oxford University Press)

Re:"Dictates of Twombly and Iqbal"

[Anonymous Coward]

Is that a rule 34 ploy?

Re:microsoft peculiarity?

[M. Baranczak]

What's Twombly without Iqbal?