Ex Parte Burnhouse et al - Page 14

                Appeal 2007-0345                                                                             
                Application 09/812,417                                                                       
                                                                                                            
                1992), as an example that qualifies as a § 101 “process” in addition to the                  
                Supreme Court’s test.  See id. at 1359, 50 USPQ2d at 1452.                                   
                      Accordingly, the Federal Circuit has consistently used its own “data                   
                transformation” test in assessing the eligibility of various machine-                        
                implemented claims.  In Alappat, the court held that “data, transformed by a                 
                machine” “to produce a smooth waveform display” “constituted a practical                     
                application of an abstract idea.”  State Street, 149 F.3d at 1373, 47 USPQ2d                 
                at 1601.  Specifically, the court in Alappat stated that the claimed invention               
                as a whole was directed to a machine for “converting discrete waveform data                  
                samples into anti-aliased pixel illumination intensity data to be displayed on               
                a display means.” 33 F.3d 1526, 1544, 31 USPQ2d 1545, 1557 (Fed. Cir.                        
                1994) (en banc).  In Arrhythmia, the court held “the transformation of                       
                electrocardiograph signals” “by a machine” “constituted a practical                          
                application of an abstract idea.”  State Street, 149 F.3d at 1373, 47 USPQ2d                 
                at 1601.  Specifically, the court in Arrhythmia stated “the number obtained is               
                not a mathematical abstraction; it is a measure in microvolts of a specified                 
                heart activity, an indicator of the risk of ventricular tachycardia.” 958 F.2d at            
                1062, 22 USPQ2d at 1039.  Likewise, in State Street, the court held that “the                
                transformation of data” “by a machine” “into a final share price, constitutes                
                a practical application of a mathematical algorithm” because “a final share                  
                price [is] momentarily fixed for recording and reporting purposes and even                   
                accepted and relied upon by  regulatory authorities and in subsequent                        
                trades.” 149 F.3d at 1373, 47 USPQ2d at 1601.  Thus, while Diehr involved                    
                the transformation of a tangible object – curing synthetic rubber – the                      
                Federal Circuit also regards the transformation of intangible subject matter                 



                                                     14                                                      

Page:  Previous  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  17  18  19  20  21  Next

Last modified: September 9, 2013