How does the streamlined analysis apply to claims involving improvements to technology or computer functionality?
The streamlined analysis is particularly applicable to claims involving clear improvements to technology or computer functionality. According to MPEP 2106.06(b):
“As explained by the Federal Circuit, some improvements to technology or to computer functionality are not abstract when appropriately claimed, and thus claims to such improvements do not always need to undergo the full eligibility analysis.”
Examples of such claims include:
- Claims to a self-referential table for a computer database (Enfish case)
- Claims to automatic lip synchronization and facial expression animation (McRO case)
In these cases, the eligibility was self-evident based on the clear improvement, making them suitable for streamlined analysis. However, the MPEP advises:
“If the claims are a ‘close call’ such that it is unclear whether the claims improve technology or computer functionality, a full eligibility analysis should be performed to determine eligibility.”
This guidance ensures that only claims with clearly evident improvements to technology are fast-tracked through the streamlined analysis.
To learn more: