直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • Articles & Books
    • Ad Law Buzz Blog
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Events & Webinars
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
    • AI + Finnegan
    • AI + Copyright
    • AI + Patent
    • AI + Privacy
    • AI + Trade Secrets
    • AI + Trademark
  • Unified Patent Court (UPC) Hub

Prosecution First Blog

Draft Bill Released to Reform Section 101 of the Patent Act

May 28, 2019

Authored and Edited by Denise Main, Ph.D.; Adriana L. Burgy

Congress continues to discuss the patent eligibility requirements; on May 22, 2019, a bipartisan, bicameral bill was proposed which could redefine what kinds of inventions may be patented. If enacted, the bill will remove the judicial exceptions to patent eligibility. This draft bill arrives on the heels of the USPTO’s revised guidance on patent eligibility that went into effect on January 7, 2019, and feedback from stakeholders, inventors, and industry representatives from an earlier draft in April. 

The draft bill text released by Senators Tillis, Coons, Collins, Johnson, and Stivers proposes the following:

Section 100:

(k)           The term “useful” means any invention or discovery that provides specific and practical utility in any field of technology through human intervention.

Section 101: 

(a)           Whoever invents or discovers any useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter, or any useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent therefor, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title. 

(b)           Eligibility under this section shall be determined only while considering the claimed invention as a whole, without discounting or disregarding any claim limitation.

Section 112

(f)            Functional Claim Elements — An element in a claim expressed as a specified function without the recital of structure, material, or acts in support thereof shall be construed to cover the corresponding structure, material, or acts described in the specification and equivalents thereof.

According to the draft bill, the following additional legislative provisions are proposed:

The provisions of section 101 shall be construed in favor of eligibility.

No implicit or other judicially created exceptions to subject matter eligibility,

including “abstract ideas,” “laws of nature,” or “natural phenomena,” shall be used to determine patent eligibility under section 101, and all cases establishing or interpreting those exceptions to eligibility are hereby abrogated.

The eligibility of a claimed invention under section 101 shall be determined without regard to: the manner in which the claimed invention was made; whether individual limitations of a claim are well known, conventional or routine; the state of the art at the time of the invention; or any other considerations relating to sections 102, 103, or 112 of this title.

Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property hearings will be held on June 4th, 5th, and 11th regarding the state of patent eligibility in the United States. Those hearings are expected to generate additional stakeholder feedback.  In addition, the Subcommittee will hear the perspective of a variety of witnesses from different industries regarding the current patent eligibility laws. Stay tuned for further updates as the hearings progress and feedback is provided. 

The draft bill text can be found here. 

Tags

subject matter eligibility, 35 U.S.C. § 101, United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), indefiniteness (35 USC § 112), 2019 Top Insights

Related Practices

Patent Drafting and Prosecution

Contacts

Denise Main, Ph.D.
Partner
Boston, MA
+1 617 646 1690
Email
Adriana L. Burgy
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4345
Email

Copyright © 2019 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP. 


DISCLAIMER: Although we wish to hear from you, information exchanged in this blog cannot and does not create an attorney-client relationship. Please do not post any information that you consider to be personal or confidential. If you wish for Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP to consider representing you, in order to establish an attorney-client relationship you must first enter a written representation agreement with Finnegan. Contact us for additional information. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. Additional disclaimer information.

Related Insights

Conference

2026 EDTX Bench Bar Conference

October 28-30, 2026

Fort Worth

Conference

Georgia Life Sciences Summit 2026

August 25-26, 2026

Sandy Springs

Conference

7th International Conference on Biofuels and Bioenergy

June 25-26, 2026

Edinburgh

Charitable

Bridges From School to Work Gala 2026

June 22, 2026

Washington, DC

Charitable

Banding Together 2026

June 18, 2026

Washington, DC

Conference

IPBC Global 2026

June 15-17, 2026

San Diego

Conference

2026 Copyright Society Annual Meeting

June 14-16, 2026

Louisville

Charitable

TopGolf for the Troops 2026

June 11, 2026

Ashburn

Seminar

3rd AI, IP, & Legal Forum

June 6, 2026

Shangai

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