What is the evidentiary standard for subject matter eligibility rejections?

This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.

The evidentiary standard for subject matter eligibility rejections varies depending on the step of the analysis:

• For Step 2A Prong One (identifying the judicial exception), no evidence is required
• For Step 2A Prong Two and Step 2B, evidence is only required to support a finding that additional elements are well-understood, routine, conventional activities

MPEP 2106.07(a)(III) states: “At Step 2A Prong One, there is no requirement for evidence to support a finding that the exception is recited or described in the claim… At Step 2A Prong Two or Step 2B, there is no requirement for evidence to support a finding that the exception is not integrated into a practical application or that the additional elements do not amount to significantly more than the exception unless the examiner asserts that additional limitations are well-understood, routine, conventional activities in Step 2B.”