• Home
  • About
    • Client Reviews
    • Patent Samples
    • Accolades
    • About Firm
    • Technologies
    • FAQs
  • Services
    • Patents
      • Patent Consultation
      • Patent Search Service
      • Patent Application Service
      • Patent Prosecution
      • Utility Patents
      • Design Patents
      • Patent Defense
      • Patent Enforcement
      • Working with In-House Attorneys
    • Trademarks
      • Trademark Search
      • Trademark Application Services
      • Trademark Prosecution
      • Trademark Enforcement
      • Trademark Defense
    • Licensing
    • Worldwide IP
    • Risk Management
    • Due Diligence
  • Industries
    • Browse Patent Samples
    • Automotive Patents
    • Construction Patents
    • Consumer Products Patents
    • Electronics Patents
    • Food, Beverage, & Other Culinary Patents
    • Manufacturing Patents
    • Medical Products & Devices Patents
    • Optics Patents
    • Software & App Patents
    • Tools & Equipment Patents
  • Learning Resources
    • First-Time Inventor?
    • Why Patent Your Invention in a Bad Economy?
    • Videos on Patents
    • Search 180+ Articles
      • Patent process
        • Overview of Patent Process
          • Patent process timeline and major milestones
          • Patent Process: Invention to Patent Granted (Simplified)
          • Patent process, overall steps and procedures
        • Overview of the examination process within the USPTO
          • Highs and lows of securing patent protection for your invention
          • What is the Patent Office procedure after filing a patent application?
        • Benefits of a Patent Search
          • What is a patent search and How to do it?
        • Patent attorneys, agents and the USPTO can help with the patent process
        • USPTO Website
      • Invention Agreements
        • What is an NDA and when to use them?
        • How to use a contract to protect your invention?
        • Working with others without losing your IP rights
        • Patent Assignments for Independent Contractors
        • Losing Invention Rights When Hiring or Collaborating with Others
        • Avoid Problems: Get an Invention Assignment Agreement
      • Protect Inventions
        • Misconceptions of Provisional Patent Applications
        • Do you need to get your patent attorney to sign an NDA?
        • Can a confidentiality agreement protect me like a patent application?
        • Four types of intellectual property to protect your idea and how to use them
          • Overview of Patents and Intellectual Property
          • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
          • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
          • Benefits of Patent Protection
          • Best uses for design patents
        • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
          • Dangers of 1 yr grace period under first-inventor-to-file system
          • File a patent application before telling others about the invention
        • Risks and benefits of securing software patent protection
          • Strategy to overcome patentable subject matter rejection
        • Pros and cons of filing a continuation-in-part application
          • What is a continuation patent application?
      • 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 costs
        • How much does it cost to get a utility patent?
        • Provisional Patent Application: Cheap Alternative?
        • Patent Cost Framework and cash flow
        • Provisional patent application: a cheap option?
        • Cheap provisional patent applications
      • Patent infringement
        • Basics of writing a patent claim for a patent application
        • Patent Marking: Everything you wanted to know
        • Avoiding Patent Infringement
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product?
        • Can I Copy My Competitor’s Product? (Design Patent)
      • 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
      • 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

Top-Rated Orange County Patent Lawyer | Helping Inventors in Orange County, Los Angeles County & Beyond | OC Patent Lawyer, Irvine CA

Orange County Patent Attorney

(949) 433-0900
You are here: Home / Patent application process / Before filing a patent application / Patent Eligible Subject Matter / USPTO REPORT ON PATENT ELIGIBLE SUBJECT MATTER

USPTO REPORT ON PATENT ELIGIBLE SUBJECT MATTER

September 1, 2017 by James Yang

The basis for patent eligibility standards

In July 2017, the United States Patent and Trademark Office published its PATENT ELIGIBLE SUBJECT MATTER: REPORT ON VIEWS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PUBLIC.  For those in life science and computer-related technologies, this is a good summary of the various competing sides one should be aware of in developing a strategy to protect your invention and enforce one’s patent(s).

Patent eligible subject matter is based on the statutory requirement under 35 USC 101 that only certain inventions are eligible to be protected by a patent.  35 USC 101 states that:

Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.

The statute permits a wide range of inventions that is eligible for patent protection.  In Diamond v. Chakrabarty, the U.S. Supreme Court construed this statute as permitting “anything under the sun made by man” to be eligible for patent protection.  On the other hand, the U.S. Supreme Court has also limited its reach to exclude patent protection for abstract ideas, laws of nature, and natural phenomena.   See Gottschalk v. Benson and Parker v. Flook.  The issue is that most if not all inventions are based in part on an abstract idea, law of nature, or natural phenomena, and thus, conceivably all inventions could be rejected as being ineligible subject matter for patent protection.

Watch the video to understand if your invention is an unpatentable abstract idea.

Software and Life Sciences are most affected

Fortunately, the current problems associated with examining a patent application in relation to patent eligibility are limited primarily to life science technologies or computer-related technologies.  Other technological arts including mechanical arts have not been affected by this.

The Report discusses the competing interests for and against the current law regarding eligibility for patent protection.  The problems are significant or felt at the patent prosecution stage and the patent enforcement efforts.  Patent prosecution refers to the process of applying for a patent on an invention and facilitating the examination process of securing an issued patent by the USPTO.  Patent enforcement refers to the process of suing an alleged infringer for damages and/or an injunction.  Software inventions are infrequently allowed during patent prosecution.  Many software inventions are being invalidated during litigation.

Many software-related patent applications are rejected under 35 USC 101 (Section 101) as being ineligible for patent protection.  In my experience, the basis for the rejection is that the claimed software invention is directed to the judicially created abstract idea exception.

Two-step Mayo/Alice patent eligibility standard

The USPTO and the courts use a two-step analysis to determine eligibility for patent protection explained in Mayo and Alice.  Under the current two-step Mayo/Alice analysis, the USPTO and the courts are to determine under step 1, if the claimed invention is directed to one of the judicial exceptions, specifically, abstract idea, the law of nature, or natural phenomenon.  If so, then under step 2, the USPTO and the courts are to look to see if there is “something more” that would transform the claimed invention eligible for patent protection.

Patent prosecutor’s perspective on the problems

Smaller software companies are at a disadvantage to larger companies

As a patent prosecutor or as a patent attorney that advises entrepreneurs and small businesses, the problem with the current Section 101 analysis is that it does not allow for any or allows for only a very few instances in which software inventions can be eligible for patent protection.  Hence, there is a low rate of allowance for software-related inventions.  The problem with the low rate of allowance is that startups and smaller software companies are in my opinion having a harder time finding investments because investors of smaller companies are not as ready to invest compared to larger software companies with a proven track record.  The Report identifies that there is a disparity in funding at different levels of funding.  Venture capitals that fund multi-millions of dollars are not affected by the current altered patent eligibility landscape as much as angel investors.  This makes sense because they are making decisions to invest based on the quality of the management team, the success that the business has already achieved in executing its business plan, its profitability, etc.  The patent portfolio may be less important to these larger businesses seeking venture capital.  However, for the smaller software companies that might seek angel investors, the investment decision is based on the same considerations but the value of the small software business would be greatly enhanced by the patent portfolio that the software business owns and can use against competitors to remain competitive.

In my point of view, the patent system should be useful for the startup and the entrepreneur.  If the startup/entrepreneur pitches the idea to a larger company or decides to enter the marketplace, large well-funded companies can out-compete the startup/ entrepreneur by taking the software ideas and inventions of the startup/entrepreneur and incorporating them into their own software products.

Great software inventions are having difficulty in securing patent protection

Another point of contention of the current patent eligibility landscape is that the methods may be truly beneficial to society but the USPTO will not grant a patent and the courts may likely invalidate the software patent.  Let me provide an example.  In Ultramercial v. Hulu (Fed. Cir. 2014), the invention was related to allowing internet users of streaming content to choose their own advertisements in return for being able to pay less for the streaming content or watch content for free.  Personally, I thought that this was a great idea.  The internet user can choose their own commercials to watch instead of having content providers decide which advertisements the internet users should watch.  This would allow the internet user to enjoy watching the advertisements as well as the primary streaming content.  It would also put pressure on advertisers to think differently and more creatively to produce entertaining advertisements.  Nevertheless, the courts held that this invention was an abstract idea related to watching advertisements in exchange for video content and included nothing more than routine conventional steps.

Patent eligibility standards conflated with novelty and nonobviousness

This comes to my third point.  The primary reason that the advertising method was deemed to be an abstract idea was that the general system of forcing users to watch advertisements in exchange for content was an old idea.  However, in my point of view, the idea of choosing your own advertisement in exchange for watching content is a new idea.  It is not abstract.  There are specific steps that one can code into software to implement the method.  Nevertheless, the report identified that a common complaint of the current eligibility standard is that the standard conflates eligibility requirements with novelty and non-obviousness requirements.  Ultramercial uses concepts of novelty and nonobviousness when discussing patent eligibility requirements.  It appears to me that the case’s implied holding is that old methods are abstract ideas.

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

Related Articles for Protecting Inventions

  • Four types of intellectual property you can use to protect your idea and how to use them
  • 8 tips to successfully protect your idea
  • Reasons to only market your invention after securing patent pendency
  • Patent protection benefits and why every inventor should consider getting one
  • Protect your idea when pitching to an investor, potential licensee, or buyer
  • Patent attorney and getting them to sign a confidentiality agreement
  • 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, divisional and continuation-in-part applications
  • Importance of Documenting the Invention
  • Abstract ideas require something more for patent protection
  • Abstract idea hard to define for patent eligibility purposes
  • USPTO Report On patent-eligible subject matter
  • Broad patents spread a wide net but more likely to be invalid
  • Misconceptions of provisional patent application


  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn

Author

James Yang is a patent attorney. For more than 16 years, James Yang has been representing clients to secure patent protection for their inventions and register trademarks to protect their brands. If you need help, call him at (949) 433-0900. Read More…

Popular Posts

  • Patent process overview
  • Patent process explained
  • How much does a patent cost?
  • Why patent your invention in a bad economy?

Patent Book

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

Navigating the Patent System: Learn the patent process and strategies to protect your invention

Read for Free
Buy at Amazon

RECEIVE PATENT ARTICLES

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

We respect your privacy.

Popular Posts

Patent process overview
Patent process explained
How much does a patent cost?
Trademark process and costs
Patent process and costs

 

Services

Patent Consultations
Patent Searches
Patent Applications
Utility Patents
Design Patents
Patent Prosecution Services
Patent Defense Services
Patent-Law Counsel for In-House Attorneys
Trademark Overview
Trademark Search Services
Trademark Application Services
Trademark Prosecution Services
Trademark Enforcement Services
Trademark Defense Services
See All Services

Industries

Automotive Patents
Consumer Products Patents
Culinary Patents
Manufacturing Patents
Medical Patents
Optics Patents
Software & App Patents
See All Industries

Contact

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

Connect

  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Sitemaps

Sitemap: Pages | Sitemap: Posts

Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

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
Complete Privacy Policy

ADA Compliance

OC Patent Lawyer aims to ensure that its services are accessible to people with disabilities.
Accessibility Statement

Service Area

From our office in Irvine, California, we serve clients from all areas within Orange County and Los Angeles County, California.

© 2023 · James Yang, Your Entrepreneur and Mid-Size Business Patent Attorney