Critics Hope Solicitor General Prods SCOTUS on Patent Eligibility

The United States Solicitor General asked the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) to review the Federal Circuit’s decision in American Axle & Manufacturing Inc. v. Neapco Holdings LLC. The Federal Circuit decided that American Axle’s method of reducing driveshaft vibration, based on a natural law, known as Hooke’s law, was unpatentable under Section 101. Section 101 denies patent eligibility to a process based on abstract law, natural phenomenon, or a law of nature. Legal Dive interviewed Finnegan partner Paul Browning to discuss the case. 

Paul stated, “This is the type of claim that’s traditionally been eligible for patent...There might be other problems with it. Maybe it’s obvious or not well supported by the patent specification, but … every invention relies on some kind of law of nature or something natural.”

He believes that the American Axle case would be well-suited for the SCOTUS due to the invention being based on a mechanical device, stating, “The technology is not extraordinarily complex.”

The Solicitor General laid out various factors to look at in the case in the brief for review by the SCOTUS. Paul said, “I think the Supreme Court legitimately wants to hear what the Solicitor General says...I thought the brief was effective, easy to follow, clear, and cited the Supreme Court’s own precedents, and it showed problems of the federal circuit decisions in light of these precedents.”

Read “Critics Hope Solicitor General Prods SCOTUS on Patent Eligibility″