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.

Contact the Docs


  • "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 #8 Overall Rank


« MBHB & Patent Docs Program on Biopharma Patent Law | Main | Director Iancu Produces Glimmer of Patent Eligibility Hope »

September 23, 2018


Becoming panel dependent in an era of one HUGE Gordian Knot only leads away from a clear understanding that innovation under 35 USC 101 need meet TWO (and only TWO) relatively -- and purposefully -- LOW hurdles:

1) Can the innovation be described as belonging to at least one of the four enumerated statutory categories?


2) Is the utility of the innovation belonging to the type of utility that falls to the Useful Arts (i.e., and NOT to the Fine Arts)?


The comments to this entry are closed.

November 2023

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