shajandr Tuesday, 08/06/19 10:33:36 AM Re: PhenixBleu post# 296844 Post # of 296900 Business method patents are passe since at least 2014. "Processes involving transformation of abstract financial data, such as that claimed in machine format in State Street, are probably patent ineligible. Second, processes that do not make patent-eligible transformations are patent eligible only if they are claimed to be carried out with a “particular machine.” It appears that a programmed general-purpose digital computer is not a particular machine, for this purpose. It is unclear from Bilski whether a particular machine must be novel and nonobvious, and specially adapted for carrying out the new process. The Supreme Court’s decision in Parker v. Flook seems to call for that, but the Bilski court did not choose to opine on this point at that time. The majority opinion in In re Bilski refused to hold business methods categorically ineligible on any ground. Judge Mayer's dissent, however, seconded by Judges Dyk's and Linn's concurring opinion, insisted that the US patent system is limited to technology and therefore it excludes trade and business expedients. Judge Mayer equated the US Constitution's limitation of patent grants to the "useful arts" to a limitation to technology, relying on case law stating that technology is the modern equivalent of useful arts." "The Alice case - 2014 Several years later, in Alice v. CLS Bank, the Supreme Court readdressed the patent eligibility of a business method. It held patent ineligible a method of securing intermediated settlement—a form of electronic escrow. In invalidating Alice's patent, the Court announced a two-step test based on the Court's earlier decisions in Mayo v. Prometheus and Funk Bros. Seed Co. v. Kalo Inoculant Co. This test first determines whether the claimed invention is directed to an abstract idea, law of nature, mathematical formula, or similar abstraction. If it is, the court is to proceed to the second step—determining whether the way the claimed invention implements the abstraction contains an inventive concept, as contrasted with being routine and conventional. Under the Alice test, the claimed invention is patent eligible only if it contains an inventive concept. The USPTO business method examining work groups responded quickly to the Alice decision. Allowances per month for patents related to finance dropped to 10% of their pre Alice value. The Patent Trial and Appeal Board has reacted in a similar manner. Only about 20% of the appealed business method rejections by patent examiners are getting reversed by the board." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Business_method_patent Butt CONvictEd and MEC have no munny to even pay their existing lawyer bills of over a million bucks owed to lawyers who QUIT because they weren't paid. Nott a chance in hell there is any munny to sue DaFed (LOLOLOL!!!) over an unenforceable bullshit business method patent. Mebbe InebriatEd can find some more CONstruction lawyers to work pro Sonny-Bono for him and try their hand at IP litigation and binniss method patentry - should be easy for CONstruction lawyers. LOLOL!!!