Software Patentability
I. Introduction
II. Software Patentability
a. Intent of USCS Const. Art. I § 8, cl. 8
b. 35 USCS § 101
c. 35 USCS § 102: Novelty, prior art
d. 35 USCS § 103: Non-obvious subject matter
e. 35 USCS § 112: Specification
III. Consistency and Predictability of Software-Patent Court Decisions
IV. Software-Patent Notice and Discoverability
a. 35 USCS § 112’s “clear, concise, exact” requirement
b. 35 USCS § 112’s “full disclosure” requirement
c. USPTO: Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (annotated excerpts)
i. 2104 Patentable Subject Matter [R-9]
ii. 2161.01 Computer Programming and 35 U.S.C. 112, First Paragraph [R-9]
iii. 2163 Guidelines for the Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1, “Written Description” Requirement [R-5]
iv. 2164 The Enablement Requirement [R-2]
1. 2164.01 Test of Enablement [R-5]
a. 2164.01(a) Undue Experimentation Factors
b. 2164.01(b) How to Make the Claimed Invention
c. 2164.01(c) How to Use the Claimed Invention
2. 2164.02 Working Example
3. 2164.03 Relationship of Predictability of the Art and the Enablement Requirement [R-2]
4. 2164.04 Burden on the Examiner Under the Enablement Requirement [R-1]
5. 2164.05 Determination of Enablement Based on Evidence
a. 2164.05(a) Specification Must Be Enabling as of the Filing Date
b. 2164.01(b) How to Make the Claimed Invention
6. 2164.06 Quantity of Experimentation
a. 2164.06(a) Examples of Enablement Issues -- Missing Information
v. 2165 The Best Mode Requirement
vi. 2182 Scope of the Search and Identification of the Prior Art [R-2]
V. Federal Statutes & Regulations
VI. Secondary Sources
VII. Brief Summation
VIII. Appendix A: Design Innovation Proposal for Software-patent Reform
IX. Appendix B: Links
II. Software Patentability
a. Intent of USCS Const. Art. I § 8, cl. 8
b. 35 USCS § 101
c. 35 USCS § 102: Novelty, prior art
d. 35 USCS § 103: Non-obvious subject matter
e. 35 USCS § 112: Specification
III. Consistency and Predictability of Software-Patent Court Decisions
IV. Software-Patent Notice and Discoverability
a. 35 USCS § 112’s “clear, concise, exact” requirement
b. 35 USCS § 112’s “full disclosure” requirement
c. USPTO: Manual of Patent Examining Procedure (annotated excerpts)
i. 2104 Patentable Subject Matter [R-9]
ii. 2161.01 Computer Programming and 35 U.S.C. 112, First Paragraph [R-9]
iii. 2163 Guidelines for the Examination of Patent Applications Under the 35 U.S.C. 112, para. 1, “Written Description” Requirement [R-5]
iv. 2164 The Enablement Requirement [R-2]
1. 2164.01 Test of Enablement [R-5]
a. 2164.01(a) Undue Experimentation Factors
b. 2164.01(b) How to Make the Claimed Invention
c. 2164.01(c) How to Use the Claimed Invention
2. 2164.02 Working Example
3. 2164.03 Relationship of Predictability of the Art and the Enablement Requirement [R-2]
4. 2164.04 Burden on the Examiner Under the Enablement Requirement [R-1]
5. 2164.05 Determination of Enablement Based on Evidence
a. 2164.05(a) Specification Must Be Enabling as of the Filing Date
b. 2164.01(b) How to Make the Claimed Invention
6. 2164.06 Quantity of Experimentation
a. 2164.06(a) Examples of Enablement Issues -- Missing Information
v. 2165 The Best Mode Requirement
vi. 2182 Scope of the Search and Identification of the Prior Art [R-2]
V. Federal Statutes & Regulations
VI. Secondary Sources
VII. Brief Summation
VIII. Appendix A: Design Innovation Proposal for Software-patent Reform
IX. Appendix B: Links
Copyright 2014-2015 by Dennis O'Reilly/Rag Hall -- All rights reserved.