Board Decision
The Board concluded that the method claims were directed to an “abstract idea, and therefore were not patent-eligible subject matter. The Board then found that a “paradigm” does not fall within any of section 101's four enumerated categories of statutory subject matter. Then, turning to the paradigm claims’ internal reference to “a marketing company,” the Board said:
There is nothing in the record of this case that would suggest that “a marketing company” can be considered to be a process, a machine, a manufacture or a composition of matter. In other words, the paradigm claims on appeal are not directed to statutory subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they are not directed to subject matter within the four recognized categories of patentable inventions. Therefore, the paradigm claims, claims 24-35, are not patentable under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for at least this reason.
Read more about this topic: In Re Ferguson
Famous quotes containing the words board and/or decision:
“What happens in a strike happens not to one person alone.... It is a crisis with meaning and potency for all and prophetic of a future. The elements in crisis are the same, there is a fermentation that is identical. The elements are these: a body of men, women and children, hungry; an organization of feudal employers out to break the back of unionization; and the government Labor Board sent to “negotiate” between this hunger and this greed.”
—Meridel Le Sueur (b. 1900)
“A good decision is based on knowledge and not on numbers.”
—Plato (c. 427–347 B.C.)