EFF: Is it patentable?
Forum » Resources / News picks » EFF: Is it patentable?
Started by: zoobabzoobab
Date: 20 Dec 2008 20:39
Number of posts: 1
rss icon RSS: New posts
Summary:
As to transformation, the court noted that not just any transformation will do. The transformation "must be central to the purpose of the claimed process," and the "articles" transformed must either be "physical objects or substances" or "representative of physical objects or substances." Today, in a one-paragraph decision in Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC, the Federal Circuit put those words into practice: In light of our decision in In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc), we affirm the district court’s grant of summary judgment that these claims are invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Dr. Classen’s claims are neither "tied to a particular machine or apparatus" nor do they "transform[] a particular article into a different state or thing." Bilski, 545 F.3d at 954. Therefore we affirm.
New Post