TAG | TiE Midwest
9 Comments · Posted by Bob Brill in business method patent, Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), financial engineering, financial services patent, patent enforcement, patentable subject matter, proprietary software
During and after attendance this week at the TiE Midwest event on Growth Opportunities in Financial Technologies, Ron May asked me about the “patentable subject matter” case I mentioned in my question to the panel. The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit should decide In re Bilski within a few months. The case reviews a business method patent claim that had been rejected (2.7MB) by the patent office under 35 U.S.C. § 101 as ineligible for patent protection by being directed to nonstatutory subject matter. Bilski’s claimed invention involves hedging the consumption risks associated with a commodity sold at a fixed price.
On February 15, 2008 the Federal Circuit requested briefing of five issues. In a nutshell, the Federal Circuit is taking another look at its 1998 decision State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc. which had said:
The repetitive use of the expansive term “any” in § 101 shows Congress’s intent not to place any restrictions on the subject matter for which a patent may be obtained beyond those specifically recited in § 101. Indeed, the Supreme Court has acknowledged that Congress intended § 101 to extend to “anything under the sun that is made by man.”
Oral argument took place on May 8, 2008; listen to MP3, at Caption enter “Bilski”. The case is high-profile.
Text Copyright © 2008 Bob Brill