Appeal No. 2004-0403
Application 09/100,684
the utility requirement. A "practical application" requires both
that the claimed subject matter be within a statutory category
(embodied in something concrete and tangible) and have utility
(be useful). Thus, a claim to a computer or a computer-
implemented process would normally be statutory subject matter,
because it transforms electrical signals inside of the computer
and is "concrete and tangible," but it may fail to satisfy the
"utility" requirement if it is merely a mathematical algorithm
which transforms data not corresponding to something in the real
world. Conversely, a claim to a non-machine-implemented process
may have "utility" to society, but the subject matter may not
fall within the "useful arts" ("technological arts") of § 101 so
as to be "concrete and tangible" if it does not transform
physical subject matter. We have held that the claimed subject
matter does not fall within the definition of a "process" under
§ 101 and is an "abstract idea," and, therefore, it is not a
"practical application" of the plan because it does not produce a
"concrete and tangible result." The State Street test requires
that subject matter be "useful" and "concrete" and "tangible."
While the claimed subject matter may be "useful" because it has
some utility to society, this is not enough. Therefore, we hold
that claims 22-26 and 28-30 are directed to nonstatutory subject
matter because they do not recite a "practical application" or
produce a "concrete and tangible result" under State Street.
- 16 -
Page: Previous 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007