直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
    • At the PTAB Blog
    • European IP Blog
    • Federal Circuit IP Blog
    • INCONTESTABLE® Blog
    • IP Health Blog
    • Prosecution First Blog
  • Articles
  • IP Updates
  • Podcasts
  • Events
  • Webinars
  • Books

Prosecution First Blog

Draft Bill Released to Reform Section 101 of the Patent Act

May 28, 2019

By Denise Main, Ph.D.

Edited by 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 Office Examinations

Prosecution

Contacts

Denise Main, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4228
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

IPBC Asia 2022

October 31 - November 2, 2022

Tokyo

Conference

California Intellectual Property Law Institute 2022

October 17-18, 2022

San Francisco

Conference

New York Intellectual Property Law Institute 2022

September 15-16, 2022

New York

Conference

2022 AIPPI World Congress

September 10-13, 2022

San Francisco

Lecture

Understanding Trademarks 2022

July 11-15, 2022

Montreal

Conference

Breaking the Concrete Ceiling: How Women of Color Overcome the Invisible Barrier

June 16, 2022

Washington, DC

Hybrid Conference

2022 Bench & Bar Conference

June 15-18, 2022

Sea Island

Webinar

Patent Drafting for Cryptocurrency Innovations: Overcoming Eligibility Challenges, Minimizing the Risks of Rejection

June 14, 2022

Webinar

Virtual Seminar

13th Annual Ethics in the Practice of IP Law

June 10, 2022

Virtual

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

We use cookies on this website to provide you with the best user experience. By accepting cookies, you agree to our use of cookies. Please note that if you opt not to accept or if you disable cookies, the “Your Finnegan” feature on this website will be disabled as well. For more information on how we use cookies, please see our Privacy Policy.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • EEO Statement

© 2022 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP