Appeal No. 94-4200
Application 07/979,139
tangible result’ . . . . " Id. at 1373, 47 USPQ2d at
1601.
Significantly, the court concluded its analysis of the
mathematical algorithm issue as follows: "The question of
whether a claim encompasses statutory subject matter should
not focus on which of the four categories of subject matter a
claim is directed to . . .but rather on the essential
characteristics of the subject matter, in particular, its
practical utility." Id. at 1375, 47 USPQ2d at 1602.
With respect to the Freeman-Walter-Abele test, the
Federal Circuit held the district court erred in applying it.
According
to the court, after Diehr [602 F.2d 982, 203 USPQ 44 (CCPA
1979)] and Chakrabarty [571 F.2d 40, 197 USPQ 72 (CCPA 1978)]
were decided by the Supreme Court, the test had "little, if
any, applicability to determining the presence of statutory
subject matter." Id. at 1374, 47 USPQ2d at 1601.
Appellant's claim 1 recites a "machine" claim having
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007