It would be difficult to patent a methematical formula alone. The use of a quadratic equation y = sqrt(x^3+ax+b) can't be patented, and if it is, cannot be protected. One can certainly claim prior art from Diophantes (200-298 AD). and the work around Hall conjecture (circa 1971) about the smallest absolute difference betwwen a square and a cube |y^2 - x^3| being rarely less than x. Rewrite it y^2 - x^3 = ax-b with x < b/a and remark that solutions in modular groups would help reduce the amount of brute force search in integers.
What is patented is the bit which helps to figure out the sign of y. This bit can be used to discriminate the largest of the solution from (y and M-y), or the positive solution from (y, -y), depending the standards you look at.
But since the patent has been accepted, you need to seek a legal advice.
As a reputable cryptographer well versed in the skills of the art Dr. Dan Bernstein points judiciously ( http://cr.yp.to/ecdh/patents.html ), the idea of recomputing y from x is mentioned in Miller 1986 as a triviality to reduce the footprint of elliptic curves points in memory-based systems.
A lawyer specialized in patent claims could help you to assess if the patent still applies if you do not use a normal basis as a representation of the point coordinates, or in the case of ecc in gf(p), or if you do not use a bit to recode the compressed value of y, e.g. when choosing the randomness k, P1(x1,y1) and computing P2(x2,y2) = [k]P1 until tr(y1) == tr(y2) removes the ambiguity (a little bit CPU costly, but why not ?).
Alternatively, you can point that the resolution of the quadratic formula is evidently more costly than the few bits saved on a communication channels and this patent is not useful at all, and even damaging for the environment by suggesting the replacement of 6 picowatts of transmission costs by 2 miliwatts of CPU costs (To be acceptable, a patent submission must be new, non-trivial and useful). Then you find a crooked lawyer preferably in California and for sure, there will be a local judge to award you a few $billions for the damages caused to the environment, for the distress caused to your programming skills and to your wallet considering the resulting delays in the release of your valuable application.
Else, as suggested in another post, you go for a licensing solution.
If your application is for the US government, you need another lawyer to assess if this patent and the way you plan to use it is already part of the licences purchased by NSA in the context of the "Suite B" of algorithms, in which case the license could already be payed for by the people of the US.