How does the streamlined analysis approach nature-based product claims?

This page is an FAQ based on guidance from the Manual of Patent Examining Procedure. It is provided as guidance, with links to the ground truth sources. This is information only: it is not legal advice.

The streamlined analysis approach to nature-based product claims focuses on whether the claim attempts to tie up the nature-based product. According to MPEP 2106.06(a):

“A claim that recites a nature-based product, but clearly does not attempt to tie up the nature-based product, does not require a markedly different characteristics analysis to identify a ‘product of nature’ exception.”

This means that:

• Claims that merely include ancillary nature-based components may not require full analysis.
• The focus is on whether the claim as a whole attempts to monopolize the nature-based product.
• Examples of claims that may qualify for streamlined analysis include:
• An artificial hip prosthesis coated with a naturally occurring mineral
• A cellphone with an electrical contact made of gold
• A plastic chair with wood trim

These examples illustrate cases where the nature-based components are not central to the invention, and thus the claims do not attempt to improperly tie up the nature-based product.