Timothy J. Maier

Partner of Maier & Maier, PLLC


Christopher J. Maier

Partner of Maier & Maier, PLLC




IP Dragon

Philip Brook's Patent
Infringement Updates

Patent Docs

Patent Pending

Chicago IP Litigation

Legal Fixation

Now, Why Didn't I Think Of That?

Patent Prospector

IPKat

The Counterfeit Blog

USPTO Examiners

« China's third amendment to its patent law contains several controversial articles. | Main | Chinese Patent applications on the rise »

CAFC to examine in re Bilski en banc

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has ordered a rehearing of In re Bilski, a case involving a patent for a method for managing risk in commodities trading. The claimed method is not tied to any particular technology, nor does it teach a transformation of computer data or matter, but is rather a method of doing business. The Patent Board of Appeals has rejected the claim as unpatentable and Bilski appealed to the CAFC.

Among the issues that the CAFC will consider in its rehearing of the case are: whether the claim at issue is not patent-eligible due to it having a mental process or abstract idea; when does a claim containing mental and physical processes become patent eligible; whether a method or process needs to be tied to a machine or involve a transformation of matter to be patent-eligible; and whether State Street Bank, 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998), and AT&T v. Excel Communications, 172 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 1999), should be reconsidered and possibly overruled in any respect.

The rehearing is scheduled for May 8, 2008, at 2:00 pm. The CAFC's order listing all five questions to be considered may be found here, while the claim at issue is reproduced below.

1.  A method for managing the consumption risk costs of a commodity sold by a commodity provider at a fixed price comprising the steps of:

(a) initiating a series of transactions between said commodity provider and consumers of said commodity wherein said consumers purchase said commodity at a fixed rate based upon historical averages, said fixed rate corresponding to a risk position of said consumer;

(b) identifying market participants for said commodity having a counter-risk position to said consumers; and

(c) initiating a series of transactions between said commodity provider and said market participants at a second fixed rate such that said series of market participant transactions balances the risk position of said series of consumer transactions.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

 

Subscribe












© Post Grant – a leading IP law Blog

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this or associated pages, documents, comments, answers, emails, or other communications should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information on this website is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing of this information does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.

Designed by Scorpion Design