Appeal No. 2006-1187 Application No. 10/056,832 To satisfy § 101 requirements, the claim must be for a practical application of the § 101 judicial exception, which can be identified in various ways: „ The claimed invention “transforms” an article or physical object to a different state or thing. „ The claimed invention otherwise produces a useful, concrete and tangible result, based on the factors discussed below. It is determined that claim 1 does not provides a transformation or reduction of an article to a different state or thing. The claim contains no step that alters a physical thing. The step of receiving product information does not involve a transformation rather only the abstract concept of exchanging information. The step of offering the purchaser an opportunity to purchase a replica does not involve a transformation, rather only the abstract concept of creating a legal offer to purchase an object. The final step of causing the replica to be transferred is broad and does not involve a physical transformation of the replica. Further, the limitation “transferred” broadly interpreted does not require physical transference and includes the transfer of ownership which is an abstract concept. Thus, the claim recites a series of abstract steps and does not transform or reduce an article to a different state or thing. The inquiry into whether a claim fails the statutory requirement of 35 U.S.C. § 101, does not end because it is determined that the there is no 9Page: Previous 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 NextLast modified: November 3, 2007