How does MPEP 2106.05(e) distinguish between meaningful and insignificant limitations?

MPEP 2106.05(e) provides guidance on distinguishing between meaningful and insignificant limitations in patent claims. The key factors are:

• Integration into a practical application: Meaningful limitations integrate the judicial exception into a practical application.
• Beyond general linking: The limitation should go beyond merely linking the use of the judicial exception to a particular technological environment.
• Transformation of the judicial exception: The limitation should transform the judicial exception into patent-eligible subject matter.

The MPEP states: “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.“

Insignificant limitations, on the other hand, do not provide meaningful limits on the claim and are typically considered extra-solution activity or mere instructions to apply the exception using generic computer components.

To learn more:

• meaningful limitations
• insignificant limitations
• practical application
• judicial exception