Track Section and Blocking (Railware v. Amtrak)

Any lawyers out there lol? This is an unusual post concerning patents for processes and software, but it's an interesting article.

As a primer, Alice is a legal doctrine: The Alice decision is about determining whether an invention is patent-eligible subject matter (under Section 101). As the name suggests, the law of subject matter eligibility dictates the types of things that are “eligible” to be patented.

Anyway, I thought it would be an interesting discussion, not in the "law arena", but in the process of blocking of tracks.

Railware is suing Amtrak for patent infringement for a process they created for blocking tracks undergoing maintenance: Above the Law

As summer chugs along to a close, Americans are doing what they can to squeeze out the last bit of enjoyment before the seriousness of September surfaces. For many, this upcoming weekend will be one of travel to a beach or a lake or just somewhere different from one’s year-round locale. Some will fly, many more will drive, and there may even be a few hardy souls that ride the rails. As a denizen of the Northeast, I am well-acquainted with the pros and cons of travel by Amtrak for business purposes. Using Amtrak for pleasure travel? In my case, that has not yet happened. But it is still good to know that Amtrak is an option, as I enjoy the ease of travel by train down to Washington for a work-related jaunt over flying or driving.

Anyone that has taken an Acela or even a regional non-Acela Amtrak train between Boston and D.C. knows how crowded the rails in the Northeast Corridor can be, especially where the tracks overlap with those used by commuter railroads. Between Newark’s Penn Station and its big brother in New York, for example, there are often delays getting into the tunnel between the two cities, because of train traffic. Such delays are nowhere near as frequent or terrible as your typical highway traffic on I-95, or those crossing into Manhattan via the Lincoln Tunnel, but they do serve as a reminder that even railway tracks around major metropolitan areas are not immune to congestion. While such congestion is inconvenient for both riders and train staff, it can be even more of an issue when a heavily-used track needs repair work. On busy rail routes, that repair work often happens around the regular use of the tracks by trains, which increases the risk that maintenance workers could have a tragic encounter with a train speeding along to its destination while the worker is still on the track.

Avoiding accidents with trains and maintenance staff, therefore, is a priority for railroad operators. A traditional means of increasing track safety during maintenance is to use a remote dispatcher — a worker who blocks and unblocks track sections being serviced — operating a centralized control system. But placing everything in the hands of the remote dispatcher could still lead to mistakes, such as a dispatcher thinking work was complete while the maintenance staff is still finishing up. To make things even safer, a principal at a leading railway management firm came up with a better solution. In his implementation, before a rail section or block could be cleared, the dispatcher would need to receive a confirmation from the maintenance team in the field via electronic means. His innovation led to the issuance of several patents, with two of those patents asserted by his employer Railware in a Southern District of New York case against Amtrak that was filed in June 2022.
...

To make things even safer, a principal at a leading railway management firm came up with a better solution. In his implementation, before a rail section or block could be cleared, the dispatcher would need to receive a confirmation from the maintenance team in the field via electronic means. His innovation led to the issuance of several patents, with two of those patents asserted by his employer Railware in a Southern District of New York case against Amtrak that was filed in June 2022.

Read: The dispatcher got called by the maintenance team over a cell phone, or notified via an app.

I bet there is already "prior art" of this. It sounds like someone would of made this before 2015, but the process would be around since the turn of the century. Amtrak is just the only one with "deep pockets" (but they didn't see them turned inside out).

I guess it's really process-related. I have some experience as I created a process about 15 years ago for analyzing data using SQL and MS Access. It wasn't the software, it was the process within the software. Begged employer to patent; they didn't want to be bothered. Yeah, blocking track sections has been around a while, but they created an updated process that limits a dispatcher's ability to reopen track without an electronic code. It differs in that a new process was created, not a new "theory"?

Forgive me if I misread the story but Amtrak does not use the traditional stop sign with a foreman in charge of letting trains into the work area much like Metro North CSX or NS. Amtrak just takes the track in question out of service to allow workers to work undisturbed. They have done it this way for years. Trains can still get into OOS tracks but the likelihood of a live passenger train is slim to none.

When a track is taken OOS two things happen one a Form D is issued to the employee in charge say Foreman Vinny Boombatz he then gets a code which he gives the Dispatcher who then enters into the computer. The track is now OOS anyone who wishes to enter must talk to Foreman V. Boombatz who must show, read or be assured they have a copy of his Form D. Then the talking by the CP of equipment if necessary can begin or if he is already inside his limits he can begin his work. Once he has finished for the day he can give up his Form D. Foreman V. Boombatz will give all necessary cancelation information to the dispatcher. The dispatcher will send him a code which he will repeat back thus releasing the track back to normal service. If the track will be out for a long term the original Form D will remain in effect until fulfilled or cancelled.
The dispatcher knows about the OOS train crews know about the OOS managers know about the OOS trust me everybody knows. Even though your not expected to go there you are expected to carry a copy of the Form D.

This is a general overview of what goes on I didn't want to get into the differences between a work area with a stop sign and all the rules pertaining to tracks OOS. Because while they are pretty much the same they are different and each railroad has a different opinion on how it should be handled.

Hey I went to high school with Vinny!

There's not really enough information in the article to make a judgement. For starters one would need to know the patents in question.

CLamb wrote: ↑Sat Sep 02, 2023 1:09 pm There's not really enough information in the article to make a judgement. For starters one would need to know the patents in question.

Did a bit of digging and the patent in question is here: https://patents.justia.com/patent/9517782

The problem is... it was filed in October 2012. Cell phones have been around since the turn of the century. I doubt this patent is valid.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sat Sep 02, 2023 6:55 pm [ Cell phones have been around since the turn of the century.

Much earlier than that, Mr. Wolf.

Remember the 1985 movie "Wall Street" and Gekko with his "Brick Phone"? Or how about the sequel movie "Money Never Sleeps" when Gekko gets out of the "slammer" and is given back his "brick"?

I first had one during 1985, permanently mounted in my auto.

Obviously the proliferation then was hardly today where, in my community, every kid 10yo and up has one.

It's the process, not the hardware. The process of using the software and hardware. IP is very tricky. It killed Blackberry.

Jeff Smith wrote: ↑Sun Sep 03, 2023 4:35 am It's the process, not the hardware. The process of using the software and hardware. IP is very tricky. It killed Blackberry.

Yes, but when you get down to it, it's the blocking process but routed through a web site. It's a marginal improvement, which makes me doubt the patents validity. You get a lot of "this but via a computer" patents filed in the past that are slowly now working through the courts. This one is no different and it will go through the appeals process.