Twenty patents. That’s how many patents were invalidated in only three decisions in the last few weeks alone. Patent practitioners cannot be blind to the enormous impact the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank Int’l, ___U.S.___, 134 S. Ct. 2347 (2014), has had on narrowing the scope of available patentable subject matter, rendering quite uncertain whether patents directed to computerized business methods or ways of conducting transactions over the Internet, by way of example only, will ever survive scrutiny.
As this column reported previously, in Alice the U.S. Supreme Court clarified and narrowed the scope of eligible patentable subject matter. The patent statute makes clear: “Whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title.” 35 U.S.C. §101. But, the Supreme Court has recognized three categories of subject matter not eligible for patentability: laws of nature, natural phenomena, and abstract ideas.
