Bilski v. Kappos
Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010), was a case decided by the Supreme Court of the United States holding that the machine-or-transformation test is not the sole test for determining the patent eligibility of a process, but rather "a useful and important clue, an investigative tool, for determining whether some claimed inventions are processes under § 101." In so doing, the Supreme Court affirmed the rejection of an application for a patent on a method of hedging losses in one segment of the energy industry by making investments in other segments of that industry, on the basis that the abstract investment strategy set forth in the application was not patentable subject matter.
| Bilski v. Kappos | |
|---|---|
Supreme Court of the United States | |
| Argued November 9, 2009 Decided June 28, 2010 | |
| Full case name | Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw v. David J. Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, Patent and Trademark Office |
| Docket no. | 08-964 |
| Citations | 561 U.S. 593 (more) |
| Case history | |
| Prior | In re Bilski, 545 F.3d 943, (Fed. Cir. 2008) (judgment affirmed) |
| Holding | |
| The machine-or-transformation test is not the sole test for determining the patent eligibility of a process, but rather a useful tool. Bilski's application, seeking a patent on a method for hedging risk in the commodities market, did not draw to patent eligible subject matter. Affirmed. | |
| Court membership | |
| |
| Case opinions | |
| Majority | Kennedy, joined by Roberts, Thomas, Alito; Scalia (except Parts II–B–2 and II–C–2) |
| Concurrence | Stevens (in judgment), joined by Ginsburg, Breyer, Sotomayor |
| Concurrence | Breyer (in judgment), joined by Scalia (Part II) |
| Laws applied | |
| 35 U.S.C. § 101 | |
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.