Patent Law FAQ
This FAQ answers all your questions about patent law, patent procedure, and the patent examination process.
MPEP 2100 – Patentability (2)
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
The key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application include:
- Improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology: The claimed invention should provide a technical improvement.
- Application of the judicial exception: The claim should apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking it to a particular technological environment.
- Particular machine or manufacture: The claim should implement the judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim.
- Transformation of an article: The claim should effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
As stated in MPEP 2106.04(d): “A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception.”
To learn more:
The improvement analysis in Step 2A Prong Two differs from the analysis in Step 2B in a key aspect: consideration of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity.
According to the MPEP:
“Specifically, the ‘improvements’ analysis in Step 2A determines whether the claim pertains to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology without reference to what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity.”
This means that in Step 2A Prong Two:
- The focus is on whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application.
- The claim may demonstrate an improvement to existing technology even if it does not improve on well-understood, routine, conventional activity.
In contrast, Step 2B considers whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, which can include an analysis of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field.
To learn more:
MPEP 2106.04(D) – Integration Of A Judicial Exception Into A Practical Application (2)
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
The key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application include:
- Improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology: The claimed invention should provide a technical improvement.
- Application of the judicial exception: The claim should apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking it to a particular technological environment.
- Particular machine or manufacture: The claim should implement the judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim.
- Transformation of an article: The claim should effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
As stated in MPEP 2106.04(d): “A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception.”
To learn more:
The improvement analysis in Step 2A Prong Two differs from the analysis in Step 2B in a key aspect: consideration of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity.
According to the MPEP:
“Specifically, the ‘improvements’ analysis in Step 2A determines whether the claim pertains to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology without reference to what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity.”
This means that in Step 2A Prong Two:
- The focus is on whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application.
- The claim may demonstrate an improvement to existing technology even if it does not improve on well-understood, routine, conventional activity.
In contrast, Step 2B considers whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, which can include an analysis of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field.
To learn more:
Patent Law (2)
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
The key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application include:
- Improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology: The claimed invention should provide a technical improvement.
- Application of the judicial exception: The claim should apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking it to a particular technological environment.
- Particular machine or manufacture: The claim should implement the judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim.
- Transformation of an article: The claim should effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
As stated in MPEP 2106.04(d): “A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception.”
To learn more:
The improvement analysis in Step 2A Prong Two differs from the analysis in Step 2B in a key aspect: consideration of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity.
According to the MPEP:
“Specifically, the ‘improvements’ analysis in Step 2A determines whether the claim pertains to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology without reference to what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity.”
This means that in Step 2A Prong Two:
- The focus is on whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application.
- The claim may demonstrate an improvement to existing technology even if it does not improve on well-understood, routine, conventional activity.
In contrast, Step 2B considers whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, which can include an analysis of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field.
To learn more:
Patent Procedure (2)
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
What are the key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application?
The key considerations for integrating a judicial exception into a practical application include:
- Improvement to the functioning of a computer or technology: The claimed invention should provide a technical improvement.
- Application of the judicial exception: The claim should apply or use the judicial exception in a meaningful way beyond generally linking it to a particular technological environment.
- Particular machine or manufacture: The claim should implement the judicial exception with a particular machine or manufacture that is integral to the claim.
- Transformation of an article: The claim should effect a transformation or reduction of a particular article to a different state or thing.
As stated in MPEP 2106.04(d): “A claim that integrates a judicial exception into a practical application will apply, rely on, or use the judicial exception in a manner that imposes a meaningful limit on the judicial exception, such that the claim is more than a drafting effort designed to monopolize the judicial exception.”
To learn more:
The improvement analysis in Step 2A Prong Two differs from the analysis in Step 2B in a key aspect: consideration of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional activity.
According to the MPEP:
“Specifically, the ‘improvements’ analysis in Step 2A determines whether the claim pertains to an improvement to the functioning of a computer or to another technology without reference to what is well-understood, routine, conventional activity.”
This means that in Step 2A Prong Two:
- The focus is on whether the claim integrates the judicial exception into a practical application.
- The claim may demonstrate an improvement to existing technology even if it does not improve on well-understood, routine, conventional activity.
In contrast, Step 2B considers whether the additional elements amount to significantly more than the judicial exception, which can include an analysis of what is well-understood, routine, and conventional in the field.
To learn more: