How can a claim avoid being characterized as mere instructions to apply an exception?

To avoid being characterized as mere instructions to apply an exception, a claim should go beyond simply stating an abstract idea or judicial exception with generic implementation. The MPEP 2106.05(f) suggests several ways to achieve this:

1. Provide specific implementation details: Instead of reciting only the idea of a solution, include details of how the solution is accomplished.
2. Improve computer capabilities or existing technology: Claims that purport to improve computer capabilities or an existing technology may integrate the exception into a practical application.
3. Implement a particular solution to a problem: Claiming a particular solution to a problem or a particular way to achieve a desired outcome may integrate the exception.
4. Add meaningful limitations: Include limitations that confine the judicial exception to a particular, practical application.

For example, in DDR Holdings, the court found the claims eligible because they specified how interactions with the Internet were manipulated to yield a desired result that overrode the routine and conventional sequence of events.

Similarly, in BASCOM, the court determined that the claimed combination of limitations provided a specific, discrete implementation of the abstract idea of filtering content, which was a “technology-based solution” that overcame existing problems.

To learn more:

• patent eligibility
• judicial exception
• claim drafting
• practical application