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.
2018 Juristant Badge - MBHB_165
Juristat #4 Overall Rank

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


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.
Juristat_165
Juristat #8 Overall Rank

Pharma-50-transparent_216px_red

« Court Report | Main | FCBA Friedman Memorial Lecture on Excellence in Appellate Advocacy »

November 05, 2015

Comments

"Unless the examiner provides a detailed rationale for rejecting claims under § 101, the applicant is left with little with which to work."

Michael,

This problem of providing a "rationale" is not limited the examiners. In the recent Bak and Base decisions, the PTAB instituted new rejections for patent-ineligibility without even providing a scintilla of "rationale," and more importantly, any factual explanation to support those new rejections based on the broken Alice test, leaving the appellants to guess as to how to respond. (Yes, the Alice test has proven to be utterly broken and unworkable, even at the PTAB.)

"As examples, BSA states that "a process by which Global Positioning Satellites use data to redirect traffic patterns, a system that automatically reorders a task list of a user based on context, or a new type of board game" are methods of organizing human activity that could be claimed in a fashion that meets the Alice requirements."

Whether something "coud be claimed in a fashion" that meets the Alice standards depends very highly on the details of the alleged innovation.

If BSA can't recognize that much, there's really no point in paying attention to their other "insights."

The comments to this entry are closed.

December 2019

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