Category Archives: Alice

USPTO Memorandum Seeks to Clarify “Inventive Concept” Requirement

On April 19, 2018, the USPTO released a Memorandum from Robert Bahr, The Deputy Commissioner for Patent Examination Policy, to the Examiners,  that summarized the support required for a finding whether or not a claim directed to a judicial exception … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Claim Construction, USPTO Practice and Policy | 1 Comment

USPTO Director Outlines Challenges to the Patent System at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce Patent Policy Conference

The USPTO released a copy of the “Remarks” made by Director Andrei Iancu, that read like a major policy summary regarding challenges to the US patent system. Specific solutions were not suggested, but Iancu identified two areas that need review … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, USPTO Practice and Policy | Leave a comment

In re Urvashi Bhagat – The Slippery Slope of Natural Product Claims

I will start out by recommending that you read all of MPEP 2106 – Patent Subject Matter Eligibility. I rarely admire PTO policy rules and guidelines, but this section reflects a lot of work, particularly in the standards for evaluating … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Govt Policy/PTO Policy, s.102, Section 101, USPTO Practice and Policy | 1 Comment

Exergen Corp. v. Kaz USA, Inc. – A Crack in the Patent Eligibility of Diagnostic Claims?

In Exergen Corp. v. Kaz USA, Inc., Appeal No. 2016-2315, 2016-2341 (Fed. Cir., March 8, 2018) (Non-precedential). A panel of Moore, Bryson and Hughes (Hughes dissenting), upheld a district court decision, following trial, that claims to a method of measuring … Continue reading

Posted in Alice, Claim Construction, Section 101 | Leave a comment