The eligibility provisions of 35 U.S.C. 101 and the jurisprudence surrounding it, as currently interpreted by the USPTO and courts, continue to be surrounded by confusion and controversy. While section 101 was originally intended to be a door that “swung wide” to admit the broadest possible array of inventions and to exclude only subject matter that would preempt products occurring in nature, natural elements and laws, the current state of eligibility jurisprudence has rendered the eligibility hurdle unpredictable and arbitrary and difficult to overcome.
This article from IP Watchdog covers why the section was problematic from its inception, the problems stemming from the pivotal Alice v. CLS Bank case, and the shortcomings of the proposed legislation. In addition, the authors provide their insights on how to restore Section 101 to its intended meaning when it was originally instituted in the Patent Act of 1952.
Firm News
Get More Information Today
METROLEX IP LAW GROUP is full service Patent and Intellectual Property law firm with offices in Washington D.C. and Osaka. We focus on high-quality work product, and rapid, efficient filing and prosecution across the world, including U.S., Japan, Europe and China.
