What is the significance of a claim not reciting an abstract idea?
When a claim does not recite an abstract idea, it has significant implications for patent eligibility. The MPEP states: “Because these claims do not recite an abstract idea (or other judicial exception), they are eligible at Step 2A Prong One (Pathway B).” This means that claims not reciting an abstract idea are considered patent-eligible subject…
Read MoreHow does the concept of “clear improvement” relate to the Alice/Mayo test?
The concept of “clear improvement” in MPEP § 2106.06(b) relates to the Alice/Mayo test by potentially allowing claims to bypass parts of the test. The MPEP states: “Although the Federal Circuit held these claims eligible at Step 2A as not being directed to abstract ideas, it would be reasonable for an examiner to have found…
Read MoreHow does a “clear improvement” affect the patent eligibility analysis?
A “clear improvement” to technology or computer functionality can significantly simplify the patent eligibility analysis. According to MPEP § 2106.06(b): “In these cases, when the claims were viewed as a whole, their eligibility was self-evident based on the clear improvement, so no further analysis was needed.“ This means that if a claim demonstrates a clear…
Read More