Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Patent Law Blogs -> The Patent Prospector
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Patent Law
: The Patent ProspectorBilking Bilski
By Gary Odom and Jordan Kuhn
35
U.S.C. § 101 cedes patentability to "any new and useful process," without
further qualification. The CAFC Bilski ruling, limiting process claims to being
tied to a particular apparatus or transforming something, has no basis in
statute, and questionable case law heritage. As dissenting Judge Newman
observed:
The breadth of Section 101 and its predecessor provisions reflects the legislative intention to accommodate not only known fields of creativity, but also the unknown future. The Court has consistently refrained from imposing unwarranted restrictions on statutory eligibility, and for computer-implemented processes the Court has explicitly rejected the direction now taken.
Full post as published by The Patent Prospector on November 02, 2008 (boomark / email).

Bilski: Much Ado About (almost) Nothing
Ex Parte Bilski: Once Again Rethinking the Scope of Patentable Subject Matter
A Madness to its Method: Cert Petition Filed in Bilski
Liveblogging: How Did We Get to Bilski and What Can We Do About It
Gardner: Patent Bar Should Use Its High Priced Skills to Overcome Bilski et al.
Bilski and Continued Uncertainty in Patent Subject Matter
"Bilski Heads to the Supreme Court"
In Re Bilski En Banc Oral Arguments.








