Appeal No. 95-1888
Application 08/011,042
because a process, machine, manufacture, or composition of
matter employing a law of nature, natural phenomenon, or
abstract idea is patentable subject matter even though a law
of nature, natural phenomenon, or abstract idea would not, by
itself, be entitled to such protection.” In other words, “a
claim drawn to subject matter otherwise statutory does not
become nonstatutory simply because it uses a mathematical
formula, computer program or digital computer.” Diamond v.
Diehr, 450 U.S. 175, 187, 209 USPQ 1, 8 (1981). Additionally,
the Court in State Street indicated that the focus of a
statutory subject matter analysis should be “on the essential
characteristics of the subject matter, in particular, its
practical utility.” State Street, 149 F.3d at 1375, 47 USPQ2d
at 1602.
In view of the foregoing, the decision of the examiner
rejecting claims 1-26 under 35 U.S.C. § 101 is reversed.
REVERSED
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007