How should examiners evaluate claims with added generic computer components?
When applicants amend claims to add generic computer components, examiners must carefully evaluate whether this integration results in a practical application or significantly more. The MPEP 2106.07(b) provides guidance:
“If applicant amends a claim to add a generic computer or generic computer components and asserts that the claim is integrated into a practical application or recites significantly more because the generic computer is ‘specially programmed’ (as in Alappat, now considered superseded) or is a ‘particular machine’ (as in Bilski), the examiner should look at whether the added elements integrate the judicial exception into a practical application or provide significantly more than the judicial exception.“
Key points for examiners:
- Merely adding a generic computer or components does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection
- Evaluate whether the added elements integrate the exception into a practical application
- Assess if the combination of elements provides significantly more than the judicial exception
The MPEP cites relevant case law: “Merely adding a generic computer, generic computer components, or a programmed computer to perform generic computer functions does not automatically overcome an eligibility rejection.” (Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank Int’l, 573 U.S. 208, 224 (2014))
To learn more: