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.
A ‘particular machine’ in patent claims refers to a device that is integral to the execution of the claimed method and provides more than just a generic application of a judicial exception. The MPEP 2106.05(b) provides guidance on determining whether a machine is ‘particular’ enough to integrate a judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more. Key factors include:
- The particularity or generality of the machine’s elements
- Whether the machine implements the steps of the method
- Whether the machine’s involvement is extra-solution activity or a field-of-use limitation
The MPEP cautions: “It is important to note that a general purpose computer that applies a judicial exception, such as an abstract idea, by use of conventional computer functions does not qualify as a particular machine.”
Examples of particular machines include the antenna system in Mackay Radio & Tel. Co. v. Radio Corp. of America and the Fourdrinier machine in Eibel Process Co. v. Minn. & Ont. Paper Co., where the machines were arranged in specific ways to achieve particular results.