E-mail Newsletter

  • Enter your e-mail address below to receive the "Patent Docs" e-mail newsletter.

Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner

Contact the Docs

Docs on Twitter


About the Authors

  • The Authors and Contributors of "Patent Docs" are patent attorneys and agents, many of whom hold doctorates in a diverse array of disciplines.

Disclaimer

  • "Patent Docs" does not contain any legal advice whatsoever. This weblog is for informational purposes only, and its publication does not create an attorney-client relationship. In addition, nothing on "Patent Docs" constitutes a solicitation for business. This weblog is intended primarily for other attorneys. Moreover, "Patent Docs" is the personal weblog of the Authors; it is not edited by the Authors' employers or clients and, as such, no part of this weblog may be so attributed. All posts on "Patent Docs" should be double-checked for their accuracy and current applicability.

Become a Fan

« Top Five Stories of 2015 | Main | No Per Se Ethical Violation for "Subject Matter Conflicts" »

January 11, 2016

Comments

what kind of specification enablement [if any] was provided for the key "automated agent" feature here? That question may have more indirect influence on these Alice 101 case decisions than is generally admitted?

The agent is software and described functionally in the specification. The description is not as detailed as I like to see, but I don't think would raise an enablement issue.

Paul,

I don't see any particularly special in the specification with respect to the specification enablement of the "automated agent" feature.

The patent is only 7 pages long and includes two drawings that include 1 flowchart and 1 diagram showing how the invention works.

The comments to this entry are closed.

December 2016

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
        1 2 3
4 5 6 7 8 9 10
11 12 13 14 15 16 17
18 19 20 21 22 23 24
25 26 27 28 29 30 31