Supreme Court hears business method battle
Eileen McDermott reports from Washington DC on the oral arguments in the Bilski case
Plus: Bilski-proof your claims
What would you have said?
Attendees lined up outside the High Court early on the morning of November 9 to gain access to the 1:00 pm hearing in Bilski and Warsaw v Kappos. The Court was packed to capacity – about 400 people gathered to hear the controversial patent case, and many more were turned away. Bradley Wright of Banner & Witcoff was in line by 9:45 am and was still the 41st member of the Bar to be admitted to the court room.
Justice Scalia kicked off the questioning, interrupting Bilski's counsel, J Michael Jakes, when he asserted that the Federal Circuit's October 2008 decision promoting the so-called machine-or-transformation test as the proper test to apply in determining patent eligibility was too rigid. "What is wrong with [the] analysis that [the term] 'useful arts' always was thought to deal with machines and inventions?" asked Scalia.
Only subscribers have complete access to Managing IP,
log in or
subscribe now.
Alternatively take a
free trial, giving you seven days access to Managing IP and regular newsletters for the international IP community, and US and Canadian practitioners specifically.
Subscribe Now
This article is available to subscribers. Please click subscribe to read the rest of the article.
Subscribe
Take a free trial
Please take a free 48-hour trial to gain limited access. Some articles and surveys may be excluded.
Take a free trial