Appeal No. 95-0394
Application No. 08/065,786
to physical elements or process steps,” and,
if it is, it “passes muster under § 101.”
In re Pardo, 684 F.2d 912, 915, 214 USPQ 673, 675-76 (CCPA
1982)
(citing In re Abele, 684 F.2d 902, 214 USPQ 682 (CCPA 1982)).
The examiner’s application of the Freeman-Walter-Abele test
led the examiner to conclude that claims 10-17 were directed
to nothing more than a mathematical algorithm. Appellant
argues that the loading of data into a memory and the reading
of data from a memory encompass physical activities, and
appellant points out that the generation of a wipe solid
produces a useful signal which is needed to produce the
transitions from one video signal to another on a television
set.
Although the examiner applied the Freeman-Walter-Abele
test in a manner which was consistent with the law at that
time, the most recent decisions of the Court of Appeals for
the Federal Circuit cast substantial doubt on the propriety of
this test.
It is the current view of the court that unpatentable
mathematical algorithms are identifiable by showing that they
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007