Appeal No. 2004-0403
Application 09/100,684
e.g., transformation of electrical signals into a different state
or signal within a computer. A machine-implemented claim starts
out with a presumption of being statutory subject matter. State
Street simplifies analysis of machine-implemented claims. It
appears that all that is necessary for a machine claim or a
machine-implemented process claim to be statutory subject matter
is that the data that is transformed is representative of or
constitutes physical activity or objects, so that the result has
some practical utility. With a non-machine-implemented method,
no implied transformation by a machine can be relied on to make
the method "useful" or "concrete and tangible."
To the extent that the State Street test applies to non-
machine-implemented process claims, the test is interpreted as a
restatement of existing legal principles. The terms "concrete
and tangible" are interpreted to mean that the abstract idea or
principle has been applied to subject matter that falls within
one of the categories of inventions of § 101, either physical
structure (machines, manufactures, or compositions of matter) or
steps that transform physical subject matter to a different state
or thing (a process). We do not think the phrase "concrete and
tangible" was intended to mean "anything definite and requiring
physical action" without regard to the nature of the subject
matter of § 101. The term "useful" is interpreted to mean that
the subject matter within one of the § 101 categories satisfies
- 15 -
Page: Previous 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007