By Brian Beck (November 14, 2017, 4:23 PM EST) -- The critical dispute in most 101 motions post-Alice is how to define the alleged "abstract idea" covered by a patent. Patent owners win when they can convince the judge that the central "idea" behind a patent is sufficiently complex and nonabstract; accused infringers win when they convince the judge the idea of the patent is fully captured by a simple and short description. The latest Federal Circuit 101 decision, Smart Systems Innovations LLC v. Chicago Transit Authority,[1] once again should guide patent litigators toward focusing their 101 motion practice around the goal of defining the central "idea" of the patent in their clients' favor. More importantly, Smart Systems should guide both patent plaintiffs and defendants toward choosing counsel who are not only good general litigators, but who can thoroughly understand the patented technology....