• Home
  • About Me
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patent Prosecution Services
    • Patent Defense Services
    • Patent Enforcement Services
    • Trademark Search Services
    • Trademark Prosecution Services
    • Trademark Enforcement Services
    • Trademark Defense Services
    • Patent and Trademark Licensing Services
    • Worldwide Patent and Trademark Services
  • Learning Resources
    • Invention Agreements
      • Understanding a confidentiality agreement: when and how to use them
      • 4 basic intellectual property agreements inventors need to protect their inventions
      • How to retain ownership of invention rights?
      • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
      • Losing invention rights when hiring or collaborating with others
      • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
    • Protect Inventions
      • Patent attorney and getting them to sign a confidentiality agreement
      • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
      • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
      • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
      • Four types of intellectual property you can use to protect your idea and how to use them
      • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
      • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
      • Beware of marketing an invention before filing a patent application
      • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
      • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
      • Best uses for design patents
      • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
      • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
      • Benefits of Patent Protection
      • Continuation patent application and related divisional and continuation in part
      • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
    • How Patent Applications Work: the Basics
      • How to respond to an office action?
      • Request for non-publication of a patent application
      • Anatomy of a Patent Document
      • How to write a broad patent application?
      • Design patents: pros and cons
    • Patent process
      • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
      • Purpose of a novelty search and resources for conducting one yourself
      • Who can provide assistance with the patent process?
      • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
      • Overall patent process steps from invention to patent granted
      • Benefits of a Patent Search
      • Overview of Patent Process
      • Patent process timeline and major milestones
      • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
      • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
      • USPTO Website
    • Patent costs
      • Patent application cost, short and long term
      • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
      • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
      • Cheap provisional patent applications
    • Worldwide patents
      • Pros and cons of securing worldwide patent protection and their steps
      • Foreign patent filing to secure protection in other countries
    • Responding to Office Actions
      • Overview of Office Actions
    • Patent infringement
      • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
      • What are the patent marking requirements and its benefits?
      • Avoiding Patent Infringement
      • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
      • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
    • Trademarks
      • Trademark Registration: common law, state and federal
      • How to obtain a federal trademark registration?
      • How to select a trademark?
        • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Schedule Consultation
  • Contact

Patent Attorney | Orange County | OC Patent Lawyer

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent application process / Before filing a patent application / Eligibility for patent protection (Patentable subject matter)

Eligibility for patent protection (Patentable subject matter)

September 12, 2012 by James Yang

Conflict

Recently, the Federal Circuit published an opinion (CLS Bank v. Alice) which appears to conflict with an opinion (Mayo v. Prometheus) by the United States Supreme Court published a few months ago.

Inventive concept in Mayo

In Mayo v. Prometheus, the U.S. Supreme Court recently held that eligibility for patent protection is determined by analyzing the “inventive concept” being claimed.  In its analysis, the court whittled out the prior art from the claims until the “inventive concept” remained.

“As a whole” analysis in CLS Bank

In CLS Bank v. Alice, the Federal Circuit held that the “inventive concept” of an idea is based on the claims as a whole.  No whittling allowed.  The dissenting opinion in CLS Bank indicated that by taking the claim as a whole for the patent eligibility analysis, the Federal Circuit did not follow the opinion of Mayo.

“As a whole” analysis less likely to lead to invalidated patents

By analyzing the claims as a whole, the Federal Circuit made it more difficult to invalidate a patent for being ineligible for patent protection.  The Federal Circuit further lowered the bar so that more inventions are eligible for patent protection by stating in CLS Bank that:

“this court holds that when—after taking all of the claim recitations into consideration—it is not manifestly evident that a claim is directed to a patent ineligible abstract idea, that claim must not be deemed for that reason to be inadequate under § 101.”  (emphasis added).

Unless the single most reasonable understanding is that a claim is directed to nothing more than a fundamental truth or disembodied concept, with no limitations in the claim attaching that idea to a specific application, it is inappropriate to hold that the claim is directed to a patent ineligible “abstract idea” under 35 U.S.C. § 101.

By forcing the district court to analyze the claim as a whole and requiring the claim to be manifestly evident that it is directed to an ineligible abstract idea, the Federal Circuit appears to be sending a signal that it prefers not to invalidate a patent based on its subject matter.

Solution

Although the CLS Bank and Mayo appear to be in conflict with each other as mentioned by the dissenting opinion, the Federal Circuit seems to be making a distinction in that CLS Bank determines whether a claimed invention is directed to abstract idea, whereas, the Supreme Court’s decision in Mayo decides whether a claimed invention directed to an abstract idea is still, nonetheless, eligible for patent protection.

Effects of CLS Bank

CLS Bank appears to be enlarging the scope of eligible subject matter for patent protection.  At least, this is the way it seems from the language of the case.  However, we must wait to see how the district courts interpret CLS Bank and Mayo and how subsequent panel members of the Federal Circuit apply the law stated in CLS Bank and Mayo.

Patent drafting strategies

In drafting patent applications, it is important to realize the differences in CLS Bank and Mayo. Moreover, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) also adds a level of complexity since they will promulgate examination guidelines on how to implement the rules based on these and subsequent cases.  These USPTO rules do not have the effect of a rule of law but as practitioners, these are the rules that we must adhere to unless you plan to go through a costly appeal through the court system.

The USPTO has also promulgated interim guidelines in response to Prometheus and Bilski, the other seminal cases dealing with the issue of patent eligible subject matter. See, 2012 Interim Procedure for Subject Matter Eligibility Analysis of Process Claims Involving Law of Nature and Interim Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility for Process Claims in View of Bilski v. Kappos.  One should also read these interim guidelines.

For patent practitioners, the issue raised by CLS Bank and Mayo affect patent prosecution strategies.  In my opinion, it is best to take a layered approach.  The patent application should attempt to satisfy the rules promulgated by the Patent Office and Mayo.  As for the Federal Circuit’s opinion in CLS Bank, the majority is casting a broad net so as to make as many inventions eligible for patent protection, and thus, minimize issues related to eligibility of patent protection.

(See comment below for my reasoning as to why the S.Ct. in Mayo was deciding when an abstract idea or law of nature can be eligible for patent protection, whereas, the Fed. Cir. in CLS Bank was deciding whether a claim is directed to an abstract idea.  September 12, 2012, James Yang)

I invite you to contact me with your patent questions at (949) 433-0900 or [email protected]. Please feel free to forward this article to your friends. As an Irvine Patent Attorney, I serve Orange County, Irvine, Los Angeles, San Diego and surrounding cities.

Filed Under: Before filing a patent application, Patent application process, Patent Eligible Subject Matter

Author: James Yang

Helping entrepreneurs and mid-size businesses since 2004. Call me at (949) 433-0900 to schedule your free initial consultation. Read More…

Professional Profile

James Yang Business Patent Attorney

James Yang, Patent Attorney

James Yang is a patent attorney whose practice encompasses all area of intellectual law including patents, trademarks, copyrights and trade secrets. Professional Profile

New Book Release

Navigating the Patent System - new book by Orange County patent attorney, James Yang

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the WHYS of the fundamentals and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

Peer Recognition

top attorney patent application
client choice patent application
Rated by Super Lawyers
AV Preeminent rating

RECEIVE PATENT UPDATES

Stay up to date on major changes and get tips on patent prosecution.

We respect your privacy.

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Services

  • Patent Prosecution Services
    Patent Defense Services
    Trademark Prosecution Services
    See All Services

Contact

James Yang
OC Patent Lawyer
2372 Morse Ave., Suite #178
Irvine, CA 92614
Tel: (949) 433-0900

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use

By accessing this blog, you agree that no attorney-client relationship is formed except by a subsequent written retainer agreement. Also, you agree to not send confidential information unless directed by me to do so. The information posted on this blog is legal information and not legal advice.
Complete terms of use

ATTORNEY ADVERTISEMENT

© 2019 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney