Chicago IP Attorney & Lawyer : R. David Donoghue : Chicago IP Litigation Blog

In re Bilski, __ F.3d __ (Fed. Cir. 2008) (en banc).*

Chief Judge Michel, writing for a nine judge majority, affirmed the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences' finding that Bilski's invention -- a commodities trading method for hedging risks -- did not meet the 35 U.S.C. § 101 patentable subject matter requirement.  The Federal Circuit held that State Street's "useful, concrete, and tangible result" test was insufficient to determine patentability -- disagreements have already started regarding whether State Street was narrowed or overturned.  The Federal Circuit held that the Supreme Court's "machine-or-transformation" test was the only test for determining patentability:

A claimed process is surely patent-eligible under § 101 if: (1) it is tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or (2) it transforms a particular article into a different state or thing.

I found Judge Dyk's concurrence tracing the history of the "machine-or-transformation" test back to the Patent Act of 1793 especially interesting:

In fact, the unpatentability of processes not involving manufactures, machines, or compositions of matter has been firmly embedded in the statute since the time of the Patent Act of 1793, ch. 11, 1 Stat. 318 (1793).

As with any major appellate decision, we will need eighteen to twenty four months of district court and Federal Circuit decisions to flesh out and fully understand Bilski's implications.  While we argue those cases and await the decisions, there will be plenty of law review and blog analysis.  Here are some of the first (I will update with additional posts as they come):**

• 271 Patent Blog (glad to see Peter Zura back in the blogosphere);
   
• IP ADR Blog;
  
  
• Likelihood of Confusion;
  
  
• Patent Baristas;
   
• Patently-O (with Crouch's usual, in-depth analysis);
   
• The University of Chicago Law Faculty Blog (Randy Picker has an exceptionally detailed take on the opinion); and
   
• WSJ Law Blog (saying experts are torn as to whether Bilski will make it to the Supreme Court).

*  Click here for the opinion.

**  I have updated the list of Bilski blog posts with some new ones.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks

Emergis Techs., Inc. v. PNM Resources & Otter Tail Corporation, Nos. 2007-1247 & 1252, Slip Op. (Fed. Cir. Jan. 31, 2008) (Moran, Sen. Jr.).*

Judge Moran, sitting by designation, authored the Federal Circuit’s decision reversing in part the District of New Mexico’s and the District of Minnesota’s claim constructions and upholding the Court’s findings of noninfringement. The Court held that payments that went “directly” from customer to invoicer were correctly construed as requiring no third party involvement. But the Court held that based on the specification, “customer invoice account number” was an invoice number as opposed to a more generic customer number. The Court upheld the non-infringement decision because the accrued systems either used third parties to process payments or did not use an invoice number.

* Click here for the opinion.  And thanks to Dennis Crouch of Patently-O for pointing out this decision.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks

The Chicago-Kent College of Law is hosting two seminars in the upcoming weeks that IP practitioners will find very useful.  On this Thursday, October 26, from 9:00 AM - 12:00 PM, the school is hosting a seminar entitled, "Copyright at the World Intellectual Property Organization: An Update."
At the seminar key World Intellectual Property Organization officials will update you on pending and emerging international copyright issues, and will address the challenges facing WIPO and international copyright policymakers.  Please note, prior registration is preferred and can be accomplished by email or fax.

On Wednesday, November 1st, from 3:00 - 4:00 PM, the Chicago-Kent College of Law is hosting its third annual Federal Circuit Roundtable.  The Roundtable, composed of former Federal Circuit law clerks, will address the topic, "Not So Obvious: Patent Law, the Supreme Court, and KSR International." The scheduled participants are Meredith Martin Addy, Brinks Hofer Gilson & Lione, Leonard D. Conapinski, McAndrews, Held & Malloy, Ltd., Sasha D. Mayergoyz, Latham & Watkins LLP, and Michael R. Weiner, Marshall, Gerstein & Borun LLP.  The Roundtable will be moderated by Chicago-Kent Professor Timothy R. Holbrook.  The Roundtable is free and registration is not required.  Because my wife, Laura L. Donoghue, former law clerk for the Hon. Timothy B. Dyk, has spoken at prior Roundtables, I can vouch for this as an excellent event that is worth a few hours out of your Wednesday afternoon.

• Email This
• Print
• Trackbacks