US Patent Eligibility in the Wake of Bilski v. Kappos: 'Business as Usual' in an Age of New Technologies?

Biotechnology Law Report, Vol. 30, Nr. 1, 2011, pp. 3-56, including a sequel at pp. 57-58.

77 Pages Posted: 26 Sep 2010 Last revised: 1 Nov 2015

See all articles by Timo Minssen

Timo Minssen

University of Copenhagen - Centre for Advanced Studies in Biomedical Innovation Law (CeBIL) - Faculty of Law

Robert M. Schwartz

Lund University Faculty of Law

Date Written: September 1, 2010

Abstract

The article discusses the recent U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bilski v. Kappos. While specifically applicable to the patentability of business methods, this seminal decision has consequences for determining patentable subject matter in various technologies. Focusing ultimately on Bilski's implications for the patentability of biopharmaceutical inventions, the paper first provides a chronological overview of the complex historical debate over patent eligibility under U.S. law. It is followed by a discussion of the outcome and impact of the rather restrictive CAFC decision in In re Bilski, now abrogated by the Supreme Court. Here a majority of the CAFC judges misinterpreted Supreme Court precedent to hold that the so-called "machine or transformation" test (MOT) should be the exclusive test for deciding patent eligibility for all process claims, implicitly including claims on biotechnological processes. Next, we analyze the Supreme Court decision rejecting this rigid application of the MOT test and permitting more flexibility in eligibility assessments. The analysis includes general considerations, as well as a discussion of the decision's specific implications for biotechnology. In that context we refer to most recent developments at the PTO and in the U.S. courts, including the most recent CAFC decision in Prometheus v. Mayo (December 2010), as well as the still pending decisions Classen v. Biogen and AMP v. USPTO (concerning Myriad’s BRCA claims). Acknowledging the criticism concerning overly broad patent claims and referring briefly to parallel developments in Europe, the paper finally highlights the effects of heightened thresholds for other patentability requirements. Considering those developments and realizing that it appears impossible to achieve static legal certainty in high-tech patenting without risking technological progress, we generally welcome the outcome in Bilski v. Kappos. Yet, it is also recognized that crucial questions remain unresolved and that lower courts are now tasked with articulating a coherent eligibility doctrine with plausible principles. Please note that this paper is annexed by a sequel summarizing the most recent developments until 31 December 2010.

Suggested Citation

Minssen, Timo and Schwartz, Robert M., US Patent Eligibility in the Wake of Bilski v. Kappos: 'Business as Usual' in an Age of New Technologies? (September 1, 2010). Biotechnology Law Report, Vol. 30, Nr. 1, 2011, pp. 3-56, including a sequel at pp. 57-58. . Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1682574

Timo Minssen (Contact Author)

University of Copenhagen - Centre for Advanced Studies in Biomedical Innovation Law (CeBIL) - Faculty of Law ( email )

Karen Blixens Plads 16
Copenhagen, 2300
Denmark
+46 708 607517 (Phone)

HOME PAGE: http://jura.ku.dk/cebil/staff/profile/?pure=en/persons/381631

Robert M. Schwartz

Lund University Faculty of Law ( email )

Lilla Gråbrödersgatan 4
Lund, 222 22
Sweden

Register to save articles to
your library

Register

Paper statistics

Downloads
343
Abstract Views
1,624
rank
85,787
PlumX Metrics