Managing IP is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2023

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Breaking: USPTO to revisit 101 guidance

Kathi Vidal

The patent office is seeking comments on its subject matter eligibility guidance

The USPTO announced that it would revisit its subject matter eligibility guidance today, July 25.

USPTO director Kathi Vidal indicated in the blog post in which she announced the news that she wanted to provide more consistent examination on patent eligibility.

She said the USPTO started to address Section 101 uncertainty after former director Andrei Iancu introduced the 2019 Revised Patent Subject Matter Eligibility Guidance, but that more needed to be done.

Vidal said she encouraged the public to send any thoughts or comments on the guidance to by September 15 2022. She noted that it would be easier for the office to assess specific comments, and that proposed redlines were welcome.

Robert Sokohl, a director in Sterne Kessler’s electronics practice group in Washington DC, said this development was encouraging and that Vidal’s leadership was greatly needed and appreciated.

“In addition to Director Vidal’s efforts, which are a solid step in the right direction for those seeking patent protection, we recognise that action by Congress, the Federal Circuit, and the Supreme Court is also needed to provide further clarity in this critical area of intellectual property law.”

The USPTO released a report on the state of subject matter eligibility in June.

The office found that stakeholders across the spectrum agreed that Section 101 needed to be clearer, more predictable and consistently applied. It also confirmed that different stakeholders maintained diverging views on the matter.

In October 2019, the USPTO provided updates to its Section 101 guidance on claims that recited judicial exceptions, groupings of abstract ideas and judicial exceptions integrated into practical applications, among other matters.

The guidance, introduced in January 2019, explained that abstract ideas included mathematical concepts, certain methods of organising human activity and mental processes.

It also included a two-prong inquiry for whether claims were directed to judicial exception. Examiners had to consider whether claims recited judicial exceptions and, if so, whether claims integrated the exceptions into practical applications.

Patent eligibility law, which is set out in Section 101 under Title 35 of the US Code, has been a bone of contention among patent lawyers since the Supreme Court’s rulings in Mayo, Myriad and Alice in the 2010s.

These edicts made it harder for applicants to obtain diagnostics, gene sequencing, software and other related patents, and made it easier for others to invalidate these types of registrations.

more from across site and ros bottom lb

More from across our site

Civil society and industry representatives met in Geneva on Thursday, September 28 to discuss a potential expansion of the TRIPS waiver
Sources say the beta version of the USPTO’s new trademark search tool is a big improvement over the current system but that it isn’t perfect
Canadian counsel weigh in on the IP office’s decision to raise trademark filing fees in 2024 and how they’re preparing clients
We provide a rundown of Managing IP’s news and analysis coverage from the week, and review what’s been happening elsewhere in IP
Shira Perlmutter, US Register of Copyrights, discussed the Copyright Office's role in forming generative AI policy during a House of Representatives hearing
The award marks one of the highest-ever damages received by a foreign company in a trademark infringement suit in China
Two orders denying public access to documents have reignited a debate over a lack of transparency at the new court
Rouse’s new chief of operations and the firm’s CEO tell Managing IP why they think private equity backing will help it conquer Europe
Brian Landry, partner at Saul Ewing, reveals how applicants can prosecute patent applications in the wake of the Federal Circuit's In re Cellect ruling
Ronelle Geldenhuys of Australia’s Foundry IP considers the implications complex computer technologies such as AI have on decision-making