⚖ Oral Arguments, with Context

The Federal Circuit hears Fraud Free Transactions versus Ping Identity. Fraud Free sued Ping for allegedly infringing two patents on checking online users' identities. One adjusts verification requirements to the risk associated with an access request. The other uses an app on a registered phone to approve or deny access from another device. This is out-of-band verification: using a separate channel to confirm the request. The patent owner says its phone-app method improves security over verification by text message or phone call. A Delaware federal judge dismissed the asserted patent claims before trial, finding them ineligible for patent protection. The appeal concerns that threshold, not whether Ping infringed. Patent claims define the invention for which protection is sought. The question is whether these claims cover a specific technological solution or an abstract way of verifying identity. Under the Supreme Court's Alice framework, the court first asks whether the claims are directed to an abstract idea. If so, it asks whether their additional features, considered individually and together, supply an inventive concept beyond that idea. Merely using generic computers is not enough. Listen for the distinction between a useful security result and the claimed means of achieving it.

Fraud Free Transactions v. Ping Identity (No. 25-1830) — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, argued November 3, 2026.