Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
08-964
IN THE
Supreme Court of the United States
A
224382
TABLE
CitedOF CONTENTS
Authorities
Page
TABLE OF CITED AUTHORITIES . . . . . . . . . iii
ARGUMENT . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Cited Authorities
Contents
Page
B. If Section 101’s broad provision of
eligibility leads to bad patents,
Congress, not the courts, should
amend the statute. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23
CONCLUSION . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
iii
TABLE OF CITED
Cited AUTHORITIES
Authorities
Page
CASES
Diamond v. Chakrabarty,
447 U.S. 303 (1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20, 24
Diamond v. Diehr,
450 U.S. 175 (1981) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20-21, 23
Ex parte Bo Li,
No. 2008-1213, 2008 WL 4828137
(B.P.A.I. Nov. 6, 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Ex parte Cornea-Hasegan,
No. 2008-4742, 2009 WL 86725
(B.P.A.I. Jan. 13, 2009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
Ex parte Gutta,
No. 2008-3000, 2009 WL 112393
(B.P.A.I. Jan. 15, 2009) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
iv
Cited Authorities
Page
Gottschalk v. Benson,
409 U.S. 63 (1972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 21, 25
In re Alappat,
33 F.3d 1526 (Fed. Cir. 1994) (en banc) . . . . . . 17-18
In re Bilski,
545 F.3d 943 (Fed. Cir. 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . passim
In re Nuijten,
500 F.3d 1346 (Fed. Cir. 2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10, 12
Parker v. Flook,
437 U.S. 584 (1978) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .18-20, 24, 26
Cited Authorities
Page
State Street Bank & Trust Co.
v. Signature Financial Group, Inc.,
149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
FEDERAL STATUTES
35 U.S.C. § 102 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3, 23
35 U.S.C. § 112 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
35 U.S.C. § 273 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
vi
Cited Authorities
Page
OTHER AUTHORITIES
Cited Authorities
Page
Derek Leebaert, How Small Businesses
Contribute to U.S. Economic Expansion,
E CON . P ERSP ., Jan. 2006, at 3, available at
h t t p : / / w w w. a m e r i c a . g o v / m e d i a / p d f / e j s /
0106.pdf . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
ARGUMENT
(Cont’d)
BUSINESS IN GOVERNMENT (2006), available at http://www.sba.
gov/ADVO/brochure06.pdf; accord KATHRYN KOBE , THE S MALL
B U S I N E S S S H A R E OF GDP, 1998-2004 (2007), available at
www.sba.gov/advo/research/rs299tot.pdf.
5. CHI R ESEARCH , I NC ., S MALL S ERIAL I NNOVATORS : T HE
S MALL F IRM C ONT RIB UT ION TO T ECHNICAL C HANGE , S MALL
BUSINESS A DMINISTRATION (2003), available at www.sba.gov/
advo/research/rs225tot.pdf; see also ANTHONY BREITZMAN &
D IANA H ICKS , A N A NALYSIS OF S MALL B USINESS P ATENTS BY
INDUSTRY AND FIRM SIZE (2008), available at http://www.sba.gov/
advo/research/rs335tot.pdf; Derek Leebaert, How Small
Businesses Contribute to U.S. Economic Expansion, E CON.
PERSP., Jan. 2006, at 3, available at http://www.america.gov/
media/pdf/ejs/ 0106.pdf.
6
pharmaceutically-acceptable carrier, an
adjuvant, and a pharmaceutically-acceptable
carrier and adjuvant.
16. Prior to the Bilski decision, the USPTO had given clear
guidance to its examiners as to the kinds of claims for computer-
implemented inventions that it understood to pass muster
under Section 101. See Examination Guidelines for Computer-
Related Inventions, 61 Fed. Reg. 7478, 7481-86 (Feb. 28, 1996).
Now, its Board is struggling to find a consistent reading of
the Federal Circuit decision. That struggle exposes how
problematic the decision is.
19
437 U.S. 584, 593 n.15 (1978). This Court has never
replaced the broad text of Section 101 with a narrow or
rigid test for eligibility, and it should not do so here.
CONCLUSION
Respectfully submitted,