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


« Inherited Neanderthal Gene Encodes Genetic Risk for COVID-19 | Main | On the Patent Eligibility of Graphical User Interfaces: Part II »

November 08, 2020


If we go back to the Bilski case and look at what Justice Stevens attempted to do there with a direct attempt to rewrite the words of Congress vis a vis Business Methods, your analysis can be made much simpler.

This though would draw the more direct question and lead to the apparent impropriety of the Supreme Court deciding of their own accord the policy decision of what may or may not be considered to belong to the Useful Arts.

It is (or should be) abundantly clear that the Useful Arts includes Business Methods.

It should be (but sadly is not) also abundantly clear that the entire mess of eligibility jurisprudence can be FIRST laid at the feet of the Supreme Court, with generous helpings of additional muckery to the rest of the judicial branch and extending out to the other two branches as well.

Drive this to its point here, and we can arrive at a permanent answer.

Will that happen?

Well, I remain...

Although about GUI patenting, the above article is about appellate decisions on utility patents claiming variable screen data displays. Design patenting of GUI screen icons themselves has been going on even before the expanded-Board decision in Ex parte Strijland (Bd. Pat. App. & Int. 1992).

The comments to this entry are closed.

February 2024

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