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

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

November 08, 2020

Comments

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).

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

November 2020

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