On June 21, 2013, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit once again reversed the US District Court for the Central District of California in Ultramercial, Inc. v. WildTangent, and held that Ultramercial's patent, directed to a method for distributing copyrighted material over the internet allowing users to view copyrighted material for free if they watch sponsored ads, is patent-eligible subject matter under section 101 of the Patent Act. The Federal Circuit's earlier decision had been vacated and remanded by the US Supreme Court in light of its decision in Mayo v. Prometheus. On remand, the Federal Circuit, in an opinion by Chief Judge Radar, again concluded that the claimed method does not merely cover a patent-ineligble abstract idea that advertising can be used as a form of currency and instead covers a practical application of that idea. The Federal Circuit therefore found that the district court improperly dismissed the suit on the grounds that Ultramercial failed to state a claim under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6).

The Federal Circuit held that Ultramercial's US Patent No. 7,346, 545 (the '545 patent) claims patent-eligible subject matter in part because:

The Federal Circuit further concluded that the '545 patent does not claim a mathematical algorithm, a series of purely mental steps or a similarly abstract concept.

Judge Lourie wrote a concurring opinion agreeing with the result but arguing that the court should have more faithfully followed the Supreme Court's guidance in Mayo v. Prometheus and applied the two-part process for analyzing subject-matter eligibility set out in his plurality opinion in CLS Bank International v. Alice Corp. (see Practice Note, In Dispute: CLS Bank International v. Alice Corporation: Second Federal Circuit Opinion).

For more on the Federal Circuit's decision and additional analysis on this case, see Practice Note, In Dispute: Wildtangent v. Ultramercial.