How should patent examiners explain rejections based on insignificant extra-solution activity?

When rejecting a claim based on insignificant extra-solution activity, patent examiners should provide a clear explanation. The MPEP 2106.05(g) advises: “For claim limitations that add insignificant extra-solution activity to the judicial exception (e.g., mere data gathering in conjunction with a law of nature or abstract idea), examiners should explain in an eligibility rejection why they…

Read More