直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
    • AI + Finnegan
    • Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy
    • Diligence, Licensing, and Opinions
    • Global IP Enforcement, Litigation, and Trials
    • Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings
    • Prosecution and Portfolio Management
    • Trademark and Brand Management
    • AI, Electronics, and Information Technology
    • Chemicals, Industrials, and Materials
    • Communications
    • Consumer Goods and Services
    • Energy
    • Hospitality, Gaming, and Leisure
    • Life Sciences
    • Transportation and Logistics
  • Experience

Experience

Making the case for business method patents at the Supreme Court

Bernard L. Bilski

David J. Kappos

In its highly anticipated Bilski v. Kappos decision, issued on June 28, 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's "machine−or−transformation" test, which required that a patentable process either be tied to a machine or apparatus or involve a transformation of a particular article into a different state or thing.   The Court also affirmatively recognized that "business methods" are not categorically excluded from the scope of 35 U.S.C. § 101.   The decision was the culmination of Finnegan’s efforts on behalf of the applicants in In re Bilski, which began with the Supreme Court granting Finnegan’s petition for a writ of certiorari filed in June 2009.  The petition sought to overturn a decision issued on October 30, 2008, by the Federal Circuit which set forth a test requiring that a patentable process either be tied to a machine or apparatus or involve a transformation of one thing into something else.  While the Supreme Court affirmed the rejection of the Bilski business method patent application, its decision overturning the Federal Circuit’s machine-or-transformation test was a victory for patents on business method and software.  Finnegan made the oral argument before the Court on November 9, 2009. 

Bernard L. Bilski v. David J. Kappos, 08-964, S. Ct., Judges Alito, Breyer, Ginsburg, Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Souter, Stevens, Thomas

Related Professionals

J. Michael Jakes
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4045
Email
Charles T. Collins-Chase
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4108
Email

Related Practices

Appeals, Issues, and Legal Strategy

Federal Circuit and Supreme Court Appeals

Patent Office Invalidation Proceedings

Related Industries

Communications

Financial Services and Business Systems

Related Experiences

RCT’s method patents affirmed in Federal Circuit’s first section 101 decision since Bilski

Research Corporation Technologies, Inc.

Victory in a closely watched financial services business method patent case that challenged the way U.S. Treasuries are bought and sold

ICAP, OMX

Protecting business-method patents for a travel-related company

FIS successfully uses PTAB to invalidate quintessential “Business Method Patents”

Fidelity National Information Services, Inc. (FIS)

Jury finds non-infringement and non-willfulness in LG Electronics refrigerator patents case

LG Electronics

Finnegan client successfully uses CBM to invalidate a competitor’s patents

Fidelity National Information Services, Inc.; Metavante Corporation

Trading Technologies International, Inc. v. CQG, Inc. 

Trading Technologies International, Inc.

Research Corporation Technologies v. Microsoft Corp.

Research Corporation Technologies

Managed litigation before Chile’s IP Court (INAPI), Court of Appeals, and Supreme Court for infringement and cancellation actions

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP