Insights: Publications The Collapse of Alice’s Wonderland: Mayo’s Faulty Two-Step Framework and a Possible Solution to Patent-Eligibility Jurisprudence (Note)
Hastings Law Journal, Volume 74, Issue 4, 1221
In Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc., the Supreme Court established a two-step framework to determine whether a supposed invention that involves a “natural law” can be a patent-eligible subject matter. Two years later, the Supreme Court extended this framework in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International to “abstract ideas,” and cemented the framework as the test to determine patent-eligible subject matter. Recent cases demonstrate that this framework has collapsed from a two-step inquiry into a one-step inquiry, leading to bizarre results and legal uncertainty. This Note examines why the Mayo framework should never have been extended to abstract ideas in Alice, and proposes a solution to determine patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. §.
Disclaimer
While we are pleased to have you contact us by telephone, surface mail, electronic mail, or by facsimile transmission, contacting Kilpatrick Townsend & Stockton LLP or any of its attorneys does not create an attorney-client relationship. The formation of an attorney-client relationship requires consideration of multiple factors, including possible conflicts of interest. An attorney-client relationship is formed only when both you and the Firm have agreed to proceed with a defined engagement.
DO NOT CONVEY TO US ANY INFORMATION YOU REGARD AS CONFIDENTIAL UNTIL A FORMAL CLIENT-ATTORNEY RELATIONSHIP HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED.
If you do convey information, you recognize that we may review and disclose the information, and you agree that even if you regard the information as highly confidential and even if it is transmitted in a good faith effort to retain us, such a review does not preclude us from representing another client directly adverse to you, even in a matter where that information could be used against you.
