Bilski v. Kappos

Media Items
Advocates
J. Michael Jakes (for the petitioners)
Malcolm L. Stewart (Deputy Solicitor General, Department of Justice, for the respondent)
Case Basics
Docket No.: 
08-964
Petitioner: 
Bernard L. Bilski and Rand A. Warsaw
Respondent: 
David J. Kappos, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director, Patent and Trademark Office

Cite this page
The Oyez Project, Bilski v. Kappos U.S. ___
available at: (http://oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2000/2000_08_964)
Facts of the Case: 

Applicants were denied a patent by the Patent and Trademark Office (PTO) for claims pertaining to a process of managing risk in commodities trading. The PTO examiner deemed the invention not to be of patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. Section 101. The Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences affirmed the decision.

On appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed. The court relied on Supreme Court precedent stating that an invention is patentable if: "1) it is tied to a particular machine or apparatus, or 2) it transforms a particular article into a different state or thing." Reasoning from this, it held that the applicants' invention clearly failed this test (machine-or-transformation test) and therefore did not constitute patentable subject matter.

Question: 

1) Did the Federal Circuit err by using the machine-or-transformation test in determining patentable subject matter?

2) Does the machine-or-transformation test prevent patent protection for many business methods and thus contradict congressional intent that patents protect "methods of doing or conducting business."