Appeal No. 2002-1554
Application 08/003,996
(CCPA 1980) (reversing the Board's conclusion that compounds were
not patentable subject matter because they were "transitory and
ephemeral in nature," i.e., not stable). The examiner does not
address this reasoning. We agree that signals do not become
unpatentable subject matter just because of their "transitory and
ephemeral nature." There is no reason why the time of existence
should affect a subject matter's status under the four statutory
categories of "process, machine, manufacture, or composition of
matter," or the three exceptions for "laws of nature, natural
phenomena, and abstract ideas." Furthermore, Mr. Kunin's
reasoning has now been incorporated into the Manual of Patent
Examining Procedure § 2106 (8th ed. Aug. 2001), page 2100-14:
"[A] signal claim directed to a practical application of
electromagnetic energy is statutory regardless of its transitory
nature. See O'Reilly, 56 U.S. at 114-19; In re Breslow,
616 F.2d 516, 519-21, 205 USPQ 221, 225-26 (CCPA 1980)."
- 5 -
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007