Appeal 2007-0367
Application 09/782,149
A programmed general purpose machine which merely performs a
mathematical algorithm has been held nonstatutory as an attempt to patent
the algorithm itself, see Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 71-72, 175
USPQ 673, 676 (1972) and In re de Castelet, 562 F.2d 1236, 1243, 195
USPQ 439, 445 (CCPA 1977). We believe that a similar case exists for
"manufactures" which store programs that cause a machine to perform a
mathematical algorithm stored on a tangible medium.
Claims 11 through 13 are directed to a general purpose machine
which merely performs the mathematical algorithm recited in claim 1 and an
article which stores a program that causes the machine to perform the
mathematical algorithm of claim 1. Thus, we find claims 11 through 13 to
be nonstatutory as further attempts to patent the algorithm.
ORDER
The decision of the Examiner rejecting claims 1 through 3 under
35 U.S.C. § 102(b) and claims 4 through 13 under 35 U.S.C. § 103 is
reversed. Claims 1 through 13 are also newly rejected under 35 U.S.C.
§ 101.
This decision contains a new ground of rejection pursuant to 37 CFR
§ 41.50(b) (effective September 13, 2004, 69 Fed. Reg. 49960 (August 12,
2004), 1286 Off. Gaz. Pat. Office 21 (September 7, 2004)). 37 CFR
§ 41.50(b) provides "[a] new ground of rejection pursuant to this paragraph
shall not be considered final for judicial review."
7
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next
Last modified: September 9, 2013