A judge has dismissed a patent claim against Rackspace involving the patenting of mathematical algorithms.

Rackspace and its partner Red Hat got the case thrown out on the grounds that mathematical algorithms could not be patented. The case reportedly marks a major victory for the open-source community.

“This is a major victory for open source software,” said executive vice president and general counsel of Red Hat Michael Cunningham in a statement.

“We are gratified to have beaten another patent for open source and for our customer. We also believe that the thoughtful dismissal by Chief Judge [Leonard] Davis [will] encourage earlier decisions by other courts on invalid software patents, reducing vexatious litigation by non-producing entities and their corrosive effect on innovation.”

The case involved Rackspace and Red Hat fighting in court over a specific algorithm found in Red Hat’s flavor of Linux. Red Hat legally assisted Rackspace in the case because the firm uses its version of Linux in some of its products.

US firm Uniloc accused Rackspace of illegally using its patent, #5,892,697, for use in its products. Uniloc was hoping to receive damages from Rackspace based on the indiscretion.

However, Chief Judge Davis ruled that Uniloc’s patent claim was invalid. The judge based his decision on a Supreme Court ruling which finds that mathematical algorithms are not patentable.

The court’s ruling comes in the eastern district of Texas. That region has been well-known for often ruling in favor of firms like Uniloc which hold onto patents but don’t openly make anything with them.

According to Rackspace and Red Hat, the case marks the first time that the eastern district of Texas has granted an early dismissal to a patent suit on the grounds that the material in question was un-patentable.

The idea that the case could be a turning point in the battle against patent trolls is also shared by Mark Webbink, executive director of the Center for Patent Innovations at New York Law School. Webbink wrote in a blog post at Groklaw that the importance of the case could not be emphasized enough.

“The importance of this case cannot be underscored,” Webbink wrote.

“It demonstrates that a court that has been favored by patent plaintiffs for years recognizes that there are some really bad patents out there, and the court is not going to hesitate to throw them out at the first opportunity.”

The courts ruling could play favorably to future cases involving patent trolls. Patent related cases involving non-producing entities have continued to hurt open-source innovation in a variety of fields.

Earlier this year, the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) took the fight to patent trolls in the 3D printing industry. The advocacy group called on the public to help uncover patents that failed to meet proper legal standards.