08 964 Bilski Oral Arg

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Official - Subject to Final Review
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNI TED STATES
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
BERNARD L. BI LSKI AND RAND A. :
WARSAW, :
Pet i t i oner s :
v. : No. 08- 964
DAVI D J . KAPPOS, UNDER :
SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR :
I NTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND :
DI RECTOR, PATENT AND :
TRADEMARK OFFI CE. :
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - x
Washi ngt on, D. C.
Monday, November 9, 2009
The above- ent i t l ed mat t er came on f or or al
ar gument bef or e t he Supr eme Cour t of t he Uni t ed St at es
at 1: 00 p. m.
APPEARANCES:
J . MI CHAEL J AKES, ESQ. , Washi ngt on, D. C. ; on behal f of
t he Pet i t i oner s.
MALCOLM L. STEWART, ESQ. , Deput y Sol i ci t or Gener al ,
Depar t ment of J ust i ce, Washi ngt on, D. C. ; on behal f of
t he Respondent .
1
Alderson Reporting Company

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
C O N T E N T S
ORAL ARGUMENT OF PAGE
J . MI CHAEL J AKES, ESQ.
On behal f of t he Pet i t i oner s 3
MALCOLM L. STEWART, ESQ.
On behal f of t he Respondent 26
REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF
J . MI CHAEL J AKES, ESQ.
On behal f of t he Pet i t i oner s 50
2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
P R O C E E D I N G S
( 1: 00 p. m. )
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: We wi l l hear
ar gument t hi s af t er noon i n Case 08- 964,
Bi l ski v. Kappos.
Mr . J akes.
ORAL ARGUMENT OF J . MI CHAEL J AKES
ON BEHALF OF THE PETI TI ONERS
MR. J AKES: Mr . Chi ef J ust i ce, and may i t
pl ease t he Cour t :
The Feder al Ci r cui t ' s r i gi d and nar r ow
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est f or al l pat ent - el i gi bl e
met hods shoul d be r ever sed. The r equi r ement t hat any
and al l met hods must be ei t her t i ed t o a par t i cul ar
machi ne or t r ansf or mspeci f i c subj ect mat t er doesn' t
f i nd any basi s i n ei t her t he l anguage of Sect i on 101 or
anywher e i n t he pat ent st at ut e.
I t ' s not r equi r ed by t hi s Cour t ' s
pr ecedence, and i t ' s cont r ar y t o t he est abl i shed
pr i nci pl e t hat Sect i on 101 shoul d be r ead br oadl y t o
accommodat e unf or eseen advances i n t he usef ul ar t s.
Ther e ar e r ecogni zed excl usi ons f r omSect i on 101 f r om
t hat br oad l anguage, such as l aws of nat ur e, nat ur al
phenomenon, and abst r act i deas. Those may not be
pat ent ed.
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
But t hese except i ons, whi ch ar e dr awn f r om
t he Cour t ' s pr ecedent , i ncl udi ng t hi s Cour t ' s Di ehr
case, al so f i nds suppor t i n t he st at ut or y l anguage,
whi ch says t hat any pr ocess must be new and usef ul .
So t he pr ohi bi t i on agai nst pat ent i ng l aws of
nat ur e or abst r act pr i nci pl es, i t appl i es equal l y t o al l
f our cat egor i es of subj ect mat t er under 101, but , her e,
t he Feder al ci r cui t has cr eat ed a new t est j ust f or
pr ocesses t hat ar e not bound i n t he st at ut e or r equi r ed
by t hi s Cour t ' s deci si on.
J USTI CE SCALI A: Wel l , i f t he gover nment
says t hat t he - - t hat t he t er mon whi ch i t hangs i t s hat
i s t he t er musef ul ar t s and t hat t hat meant , or i gi nal l y,
and st i l l means manuf act ur i ng ar t s, ar t s deal i ng wi t h
wor kmen, wi t h - - you know, i nvent or s, l i ke Lor enzo
J ones, not - - not somebody who wr i t es a book on how t o
wi n f r i ends and i nf l uence peopl e.
What i s wr ong wi t h t hat anal ysi s, t hat
t hat ' s what " usef ul ar t s" meant , t hat i t al ways - -
al ways was t hought t o deal wi t h machi nes and i nvent i ons?
MR. J AKES: Cer t ai nl y, " usef ul ar t s"
encompasses i ndust r i al pr ocesses, manuf act ur i ng
pr ocesses, but i t has never been l i mi t ed j ust t o t hose
t ypes of pr ocesses. I ' l l admi t t hat dur i ng t he
I ndust r i al Revol ut i on most of t he i nvent i ons concer ned
4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
machi nes and manuf act ur i ng pr ocesses. But we have ci t ed
count er - exampl es t hat show t hat busi ness was al so wi t hi n
t he usef ul ar t s.
I t ' s al so up t o Congr ess t o deci de how t o
i mpl ement t he pat ent syst emand t he st at ut or y - -
J USTI CE BREYER: Wel l , i f you l eave
somet hi ng out , Congr ess can put i t back i n, t ai l or i ng
t he pr ot ect i on t o what t hey f eel i s necessar y. But i f
i t cover s ever yt hi ng under t he sun, I ' ve never seen a
case wher e Congr ess woul d t ake somet hi ng out .
Now, i f we ar e r el yi ng on Congr ess, I guess
t he ci r cui t woul d say, l et ' s go nar r ow, and we
woul dn' t - - you know - - si nce you r ef er r ed t o Congr ess,
I t hought I woul d br i ng t hat up and see what you t hi nk.
MR. J AKES: Congr ess has act ed i n cer t ai n
ci r cumst ances. One of t hemi s i n sect i on 273, t o
pr ovi de pr i or user r i ght s f or busi ness met hods. Anot her
ar ea i s 287( c) , wher e medi cal act i vi t i es ar e al so
exempt ed f r omr emedi es under t he st at ut e.
Ther e has been a bi l l i nt r oduced t o exempt
t ax avoi dance met hods, but t hat has not yet been passed.
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: But you say you woul d say
t ax avoi dance met hods ar e cover ed, j ust as t he pr ocess
her e i s cover ed. So an est at e pl an, t ax avoi dance, how
t o r esi st a cor por at e t akeover , how t o choose a j ur y,
5
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
al l of t hose ar e pat ent abl e?
MR. J AKES: They ar e el i gi bl e f or pat ent i ng
as pr ocesses, assumi ng t hey meet t he ot her st at ut or y
r equi r ement s.
J USTI CE BREYER: So t hat woul d mean t hat
ever y - - ever y busi nessman - - per haps not ever y, but
ever y successf ul busi nessman t ypi cal l y has somet hi ng.
Hi s f i r mwoul dn' t be successf ul i f he di dn' t have
anyt hi ng t hat ot her s di dn' t have. He t hi nks of a new
way t o or gani ze. He t hi nks of a new t hi ng t o say on t he
t el ephone. He t hi nks of somet hi ng. That ' s how he made
hi s money.
And your vi ew woul d be - - and i t ' s new, t oo,
and i t ' s usef ul , made hi ma f or t une - - anyt hi ng t hat
hel ps any busi nessman succeed i s pat ent abl e because we
r educe i t t o a number of st eps, expl ai n i t i n gener al
t er ms, f i l e our appl i cat i on, gr ant ed?
MR. J AKES: I t i s pot ent i al l y pat ent abl e,
yes.
J USTI CE BREYER: Okay. Wel l t hen, i f t hat
wer e so, we go back t o t he or i gi nal pur pose of t he
Const i t ut i on. Do you t hi nk t hat t he f r amer s woul d have
want ed t o r equi r e anyone successf ul i n t hi s gr eat , vast ,
new cont i nent because he t hi nks of somet hi ng new t o have
had t o r un t o Washi ngt on and t o f or ce any possi bl e
6
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
compet i t or t o do a sear ch and t hen st op t he wheel s of
pr ogr ess unl ess t hey get per mi ssi on?
I s t hat a pl ausi bl e vi ew of t he pat ent
cl ause?
MR. J AKES: No, Your Honor . I woul dn' t
char act er i ze i t t hat way, but I do bel i eve t hat - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: So how do we l i mi t i t t o
somet hi ng t hat i s r easonabl e? Meani ng, i f we don' t
l i mi t i t t o i nvent i ons or t o t echnol ogy, as some ami ci
have, or t o some t i e or t et her , bor r owi ng t he Sol i ci t or
Gener al ' s phr aseol ogy, t o t he sci ences, t o t he usef ul
ar t s, t hen why not pat ent t he met hod of speed dat i ng?
MR. J AKES: Wel l , f i r st of al l , I t hi nk,
l ooki ng at what ar e usef ul ar t s, i t does excl ude some
t hi ngs. I t does excl ude t he f i ne ar t s. Speaki ng,
l i t er at ur e, poems, I t hi nk we al l agr ee t hat t hose ar e
not i ncl uded, and t her e ar e ot her t hi ngs as wel l . For
exampl e, a cor por at i on, a human bei ng, t hese ar e t hi ngs
t hat ar e not cover ed by t he st at ut or y cat egor i es.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: So why ar e human
act i vi t i es cover ed by usef ul ar t s?
MR. J AKES: Human act i vi t i es ar e cover ed.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Wel l , you ar e sayi ng
t hey ar e cover ed, but why shoul d t hey be?
MR. J AKES: I bel i eve t he st at ut e pr ovi des
7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
f or t hemt o be cover ed by def i ni ng t hemas a pr ocess. I
can gi ve you a - - one good exampl e, whi ch woul d be a
sur gi cal met hod per f or med by a doct or . Those ar e
pat ent abl e. They ar e pat ent el i gi bl e. I n sect i on
287( c) , Congr ess has car ved out and sai d, you can' t go
af t er t he doct or f or i nf r i ngement , but t hat i s an
ent i r el y human act i vi t y, and i t has l ong been
pat ent abl e.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Do you t hi nk t hat t her e
i s some benef i t t o soci et y f r ompat ent i ng a met hod t o
cur e someone t hat i nvol ves j ust human act i vi t y, as
opposed t o some machi ne, subst ance, or ot her appar at us
t o hel p t hat pr ocess?
MR. J AKES: Yes.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Do you bel i eve t hat t hat
was t he i nt ent of t he pat ent l aw?
MR. J AKES: I bel i eve t hat f al l s wi t hi n t he
usef ul ar t s, and I bel i eve t hat t her e i s an advant age t o
t hat . Ther e ar e r eal l y t wo advant ages t o t he pat ent
syst em. One i s encour agi ng peopl e t o come up wi t h new
t hi ngs, such as a sur gi cal met hod or met hod of hedgi ng
consumpt i on r i sk.
The ot her i s t he di scl osur e aspect . A
doct or mi ght choose t o keep i t secr et .
J USTI CE BREYER: So you ar e goi ng t o answer
8
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
t hi s quest i on yes. You know, I have a gr eat , wonder f ul ,
r eal l y or i gi nal met hod of t eachi ng ant i t r ust l aw, and i t
kept 80 per cent of t he st udent s awake. They l ear ned
t hi ngs - -
( Laught er . )
J USTI CE BREYER: I t was f abul ous. And I
coul d pr obabl y have r educed i t t o a set of st eps and
ot her t eacher s coul d have f ol l owed i t . That you ar e
goi ng t o say i s pat ent abl e, t oo?
MR. J AKES: Pot ent i al l y.
J USTI CE BREYER: Okay. Fi ne. Now, suppose
I r ej ect t hat vi ew, hypot het i cal l y, and suppose I wer e
t o t ake t he vi ew t hat t hi s i s way t oo f ar , t hat t hat i s
not t he pur pose of t he st at ut e. Suppose f or
hypot het i cal ' s sake I ' mst i l l a l i t t l e ner vous about
t hat - - t hat ci r cui t ' s deci si on t her e. Have you any
suggest i on f or me?
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk t hat we shoul d go back
t o t he f i r st pr i nci pl es t hat wer e enunci at ed i n Di ehr
and ot her cases, t hat abst r act i deas per se ar e not
pat ent abl e. That ' s my posi t i on, and what I woul d
advocat e i n t hi s case and any case, as l ong as you' r e - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: What - - I ' ml ooki ng
at your Cl ai m1, i n J oi nt Appendi x page 19 t o 20. How
i s t hat not an abst r act i dea? You i ni t i at e a ser i es of
9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
t r ansact i ons bet ween commodi t y pr ovi der s and commodi t y
consumer s. You set a f i xed pr i ce at t he consumer end,
you set a f i xed pr i ce at t he ot her end, and t hat ' s i t .
I mean, I coul d pat ent a pr ocess wher e I do
t he same t hi ng. I i ni t i at e a ser i es of t r ansact i ons
wi t h sel l er s. I i ni t i at e a ser i es of t r ansact i ons wi t h
buyer s. I buy l ow and sel l hi gh. That ' s my pat ent f or
maxi mi zi ng weal t h.
I don' t see how t hat ' s di f f er ent t han your
cl ai mnumber 1.
MR. J AKES: I f t hat was a novel and
unobvi ous met hod, t hen i t shoul d be pat ent abl e, but i t ' s
el i gi bl e as subj ect mat t er - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: Wel l , but your Cl ai m
1 i t seems t o me i s cl assi c commodi t y hedgi ng t hat has
been goi ng on f or cent ur i es.
MR. J AKES: Your Honor , i f t hat wer e t r ue,
t hen we shoul d r un af oul of t he obvi ousness pr ovi si on
under sect i on 103. Now, t he Pat ent Of f i ce di d i ni t i al l y
al l ow some of our cl ai ms over t he pr i or ar t .
J USTI CE KENNEDY: But you know, t he
i nsur ance i ndust r y - - t he i nsur ance busi ness, as we know
i t , r eal l y began i n Engl and i n 1680, when t hey
di scover ed di f f er ent i al cal cul us, and t hey had
expect ancy and act uar i al t abl es, act uar i al f or l i f e,
10
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
expect ancy f or shi ppi ng, and t hi s r eal l y cr eat ed a whol e
new i ndust r y.
I n your vi ew, I t hi nk, cl ear l y t hose woul d
be pat ent abl e, t he - - t he expl anat i on of how t o compi l e
an act uar i al t abl e and - - and appl y i t t o r i sk. That
cer t ai nl y woul d be pat ent abl e under your vi ew, and
i t ' s - - i t ' s di f f i cul t f or me t o t hi nk t hat Congr ess
woul d want t o - - woul d have want ed t o gi ve onl y one
per son t he capaci t y t o i ssue i nsur ance.
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk t hat met hod woul d be
pat ent el i gi bl e. But , as you sai d, i t woul d have t o be
r educed t o a concr et e set of st eps, l i ke our cl ai m1.
Now, cl ai m1 may be wr i t t en i n br oad t er ms and i t may
some day r un i nt o t he pr i or ar t , but i t does r equi r e
peopl e t o do act ual t hi ngs.
I t hi nk even t he Pat ent Of f i ce agr eed t hat
t her e ar e physi cal st eps i n our met hod her e. And i n t he
i nsur ance met hod - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: I ' msor r y.
J ust what ar e t he physi cal st eps? I ni t i at i ng a ser i es
of t r ansact i ons bet ween commodi t y pr ovi der and mar ket
par t i ci pant s?
MR. J AKES: That woul d be one.
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: You get on t he phone
and you cal l t he baker and you get on t he phone and you
11
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cal l t he gr ocer and say: I can set up a deal f or bot h
of you?
MR. J AKES: I t coul d be. I t coul d be done
t hat way because i t does t ake a per son act i ng t o do
t hat . I t ' s not pur el y - -
J USTI CE KENNEDY: And so i n t he i nsur ance
case i t t akes a per son t o go over t o t he Bur eau of
St at i st i cs and compi l e st at i st i cs on - - on l i f e - - on
l i f e expect ancy.
MR. J AKES: That coul d be. Now, t he pat ent
on t he dat a, t hat ' s anot her cat egor y t hat ' s not i ncl uded
i n t he subj ect mat t er of t hose f our cat egor i es. The
dat a i t sel f i s not pat ent abl e, but i f i t i s a ser i es of
st eps, i t shoul d be el i gi bl e as l ong as i t meet s t he
ot her st at ut or y r equi r ement s as a pr ocess.
Ther e i s not hi ng i n t he usef ul ar t s - - now,
we have hear d t he wor d " t echnol ogy. " That can be a
di f f i cul t t er m, because t echnol ogy i n i t s br oadest sense
means t he appl i cat i on of knowl edge as opposed t o gener al
knowl edge.
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: I sn' t t hat t he basi s on
whi ch t he pat ent l aw r est s i n Eur ope, i n ot her
count r i es? They do not per mi t busi ness met hod pat ent s.
I t has t o be t i ed t o t echnol ogy, t o sci ence or
t echnol ogy. So i f ot her syst ems ar e abl e t o wor k wi t h
12
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
t he not i on of t echnol ogy- based, why not our s?
MR. J AKES: I woul d agr ee, Your Honor .
Ther e ar e t hose syst ems t hat do have a r equi r ement l i ke
t hat . Our s does not . Our s speaks i n ver y br oad
t er ms about havi ng - -
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: But I was t al ki ng about
- - you sai d t hat t echnol ogy- based, t hat woul dn' t wor k
because t her e ar e so many def i ni t i ons. I ' msi mpl y
aski ng you t he quest i on: Does i t wor k wi t h t hese ot her
syst ems? That t hey - - t hey excl ude busi ness met hods,
t hey i ncl ude t echnol ogy- based - -
MR. J AKES: That ' s r i ght . But t hey have
al so def i ned " t echnol ogy" i n such a way as t o excl ude
busi ness met hods. And I don' t t hi nk we can do t hat .
The f i el ds of oper at i ons r esear ch,
i ndust r i al engi neer i ng, even f i nanci al engi neer i ng,
t her e has been an expl osi on i n t hese par t i cul ar f i el ds,
and t o now cal l t hemnon- t echnol ogi cal because t hey
di dn' t exi st over 100 year s ago woul dn' t make - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Ar e you suggest i ng t hey
di dn' t exi st because we di dn' t gi ve t hempat ent s
100 year s ago?
MR. J AKES: No.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Or t hey exi st because
comput er s have i ncr eased - -
13
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. J AKES: I t ' s ver y much r el at ed t o our
cur r ent economy and st at e of t echnol ogy, wi t h comput er s
and t he I nt er net and t he f r ee f l ow of i nf or mat i on. But
t hat ' s what - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: But a pat ent l i mi t s t he
f r ee f l ow of i nf or mat i on. I t r equi r es l i censi ng f ees
and ot her st eps, l egal st eps. So you can' t ar gue t hat
your def i ni t i on i s i mpr ovi ng t he f r ee f l ow of
i nf or mat i on.
MR. J AKES: Your Honor , I woul d, because of
t he di scl osur e r equi r ement of t he pat ent l aws. I t
r equi r es peopl e t o di scl ose t hei r i nvent i ons r at her t han
keepi ng t hemsecr et , so t her e i s a second benef i t t o t he
pat ent syst emj ust ot her t han encour agi ng peopl e t o
i nvent , and t hat i s t o have t hat i nf or mat i on get t o t he
publ i c gener al l y. And i n exchange f or t hat - -
J USTI CE SCALI A: Even t hough t he publ i c
can' t use i t , r i ght , unt i l t he pat ent expi r es?
MR. J AKES: Unt i l t he pat ent expi r es, i f a
val i d pat ent i ssues on t hat , yes.
But t hat ' s our syst em. We do gi ve excl usi ve
r i ght s i n exchange f or t hat i nf or mat i on bei ng pr ovi ded
t o t he publ i c.
J USTI CE STEVENS: May I ask t hi s quest i on?
What do you t hi nk t he st r ongest case f r omour
14
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
j ur i spr udence i s t o suppor t your posi t i on?
MR. J AKES: I woul d say i t ' s t he Di ehr case.
J USTI CE STEVENS: Whi ch one?
MR. J AKES: Di ehr . Di amond v. Di ehr .
J USTI CE STEVENS: Di ehr ?
MR. J AKES: Yes.
J USTI CE STEVENS: That was not hi ng l i ke t hi s
pat ent .
MR. J AKES: No, i t ' s not , but I t hi nk i t - -
J USTI CE STEVENS: Ther e' s l anguage i n t he
opi ni on.
MR. J AKES: I t out l i nes t he gener al
pr i nci pl es and al so t el l s us t hat t her e ar e onl y t hese
speci f i c t hi ngs t hat ar e not i ncl uded wi t hi n t he subj ect
mat t er .
J USTI CE STEVENS: But i s i t cor r ect t hat
t her e' s none - - none of our cases have ever appr oved a
r ul e such as you advocat e?
MR. J AKES: I don' t t hi nk t hi s par t i cul ar
subj ect mat t er has been r ul ed on by t he Cour t .
Now, i n Dann v. J ohnst on i n t he 70s, t her e
was a case t hat coul d have been deci ded on t he gr ounds
t hat i t was a met hod of doi ng busi ness, and i nst ead t he
Cour t cl ose t o deci de t hat case based on obvi ousness.
And r eal l y - -
15
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
J USTI CE SCALI A: You know, you ment i on t hat
t her e ar e al l t hese - - t hese new ar eas t hat di dn' t exi st
i n t he past because of moder n busi ness and what - not , but
t her e ar e al so ar eas t hat exi st ed i n t he past t hat don' t
exi st t oday. Let ' s t ake t r ai ni ng hor ses. Don' t you
t hi nk t hat - - t hat some peopl e, hor se whi sper er s or
ot her s, had some, you know, some i nsi ght s i nt o t he best
way t o t r ai n hor ses? And t hat shoul d have been
pat ent abl e on your t heor y.
MR. J AKES: They mi ght have, yes.
J USTI CE SCALI A: Wel l , why di dn' t anybody
pat ent t hose t hi ngs?
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk our economy was based on
i ndust r i al pr ocess.
J USTI CE SCALI A: I t was based on hor ses, f or
Pet e' s sake. You - - I woul d r eal l y have t hought
somebody woul d have pat ent ed t hat .
MR. J AKES: Ther e ar e al so i ssues wi t h
enf or cement . I can' t r eal l y answer why somebody
woul dn' t have.
Ther e ar e t eachi ng met hods t hat wer e
pat ent ed. Ther e ar e a number of t hemt hat we' ve
i ncl uded i n our br i ef wher e t her e wer e pat ent s i ssued
f or t eachi ng met hods, and I don' t t hi nk t hat we' ve had a
ser i ous enf or cement pr obl emwi t h peopl e bei ng sued f or
16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
usi ng t eachi ng met hods. But t her e have been t hose
peopl e who have sought t o pat ent t hemr at her t han keep
t hemas secr et s or j ust use t hem.
J USTI CE SCALI A: How ol d - - how ol d wer e
t hose, t hose cases?
MR. J AKES: They r ange. Some of t hemgo
back qui t e a ways, t o t he l ast cent ur y.
J USTI CE STEVENS: May I ask t hi s gener al
quest i on, t oo? I have al ways admi r ed J udge Ri ch, who
was ver y act i ve i n dr af t i ng t he ' 52 amendment s.
MR. J AKES: Yes.
J USTI CE STEVENS: Has he wr i t t en anyt hi ng on
t hi s par t i cul ar i ssue.
MR. J AKES: He has wr i t t en a number of
t hi ngs. And I t hi nk one of t he t hi ngs t hat t he
Sol i ci t or Gener al quot es i n t hei r br i ef i s f r oman
ar t i cl e t hat he wr ot e.
But he al so wr ot e t he Al appat deci si on and
t he St at e St r eet Bank case as wel l . And t hose I t hi nk,
st and as hi s vi ews, hi s l at est vi ews on what was
pat ent - el i gi bl e subj ect mat t er , l ooki ng at t he St at e
St r eet Bank case.
J USTI CE KENNEDY: I n t he Di ehr case, t he
Cour t sai d t hat i n t he end t he abst r act i dea must be i n
a pr ocess t hat , oh, i mpl ement s a pr oposal t hat t he
17
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pat ent l aws wer e desi gned t o pr ot ect , whi ch br i ngs you
al most back t o t he begi nni ng.
MR. J AKES: I t does.
J USTI CE KENNEDY: You don' t - - you don' t
know much f r omt hat l anguage. But t hat was somet hi ng
t hat you coul d t ouch, t hat you coul d see, t hat l ooked
l i ke a machi ne, t he subst ance was di f f er ent bef or e t he
pr ocess and af t er t he pr ocess. And - - and none of
t hat ' s appl i cabl e her e. I t ' s - -
MR. J AKES: The Di ehr i nvent i on was an
i ndust r i al pr ocess of t he convent i onal t ype, because i t
was a met hod of cur i ng r ubber . But t oday t he r aw
mat er i al s ar e j ust as l i kel y t o be i nf or mat i on or
el ect r oni c si gnal s, and t o si mpl y r oot us i n t he
i ndust r i al er a because t hat ' s what we knew I t hi nk woul d
be wr ong and cont r ar y t o t he f or war d- l ooki ng aspect of
t he pat ent l aw.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Wel l , i sn' t t he
mani pul at i on of el ect r oni c si gnal s a subst ance t hat i s
di f f er ent i n ki nd f r omj ust a met hod of how t o go about
doi ng busi ness or a met hod of how t o appr oach a
par t i cul ar pr obl em?
I sn' t t her e - - i sn' t t hat what t he Feder al
Ci r cui t was t r yi ng t o expl ai n, whi ch i s t hat t her e has
t o be somet hi ng mor e subst ant i ve t han t he mer e exchange
18
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
of i nf or mat i on; t hat i t has t o i nvol ve - - i t used t he
wor d " t r ansf or mat i on. " I t hasn' t def i ned t he out er
l i mi t s of what i t means by t hat .
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk t her e i s a di f f er ence.
But by r i gi dl y l ooki ng at t hat t r ansf or mat i on t est , what
you do i s you excl ude l ot s of ot her t hi ngs wher e t he
t r ansf or mat i on i s not r equi r ed - -
J USTI CE BREYER: That ' s exact l y what I - -
maybe I can get you t o i nadver t ent l y hel p my - - my
hypot hesi s you don' t l i ke. That ' s why I say i t ' s
i nadver t ent .
You sai d t her e ar e t wo t hi ngs. Ther e ar e
act ual l y f our t hi ngs i n t he pat ent l aw whi ch ever yone
accept s. Ther e ar e t wo t hat ar e pl us and t wo t hat ar e
mi nus. And t he t wo t hat ar e pl us i s by gi vi ng peopl e a
monopol y, you get t hemt o pr oduce mor e. As you sai d,
you get t hemt o di scl ose.
The t wo mi nuses ar e t hey char ge a hi gher
pr i ce, so peopl e use t he pr oduct l ess; and mor eover , t he
act of get t i ng per mi ssi ons and havi ng t o get per mi ssi on
can r eal l y sl ow t hi ngs down and dest r oy advance. So
t her e i s a bal ance.
I n t he ni net eent h cent ur y, t hey made i t one
way wi t h r espect t o machi nes. Now you' r e t el l i ng us:
Make i t t oday i n r espect t o i nf or mat i on. And i f you ask
19
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
me as a per son how t o make t hat bal ance i n r espect t o
i nf or mat i on, i f I amhonest , I have t o t el l you: I
don' t know. And I don' t know whet her acr oss t he boar d
or i n t hi s ar ea or t hat ar ea pat ent pr ot ect i on wi l l do
no har mor mor e har mt han good.
So t hat ' s t he t r ue si t uat i on i n whi ch I f i nd
mysel f i n r espect t o your ar gument . And i t ' s i n r espect
t o t hat , I woul d say: Al l r i ght , so what do I do?
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk t he answer i s t o f ol l ow
t he st at ut e.
J USTI CE BREYER: Wel l , t hank you. I t hought
t hat was t he i ssue, not t he answer .
( Laught er . )
MR. J AKES: Congr ess has spoken i n br oad
t er ms and gi ven us t hose f our cat egor i es, and by l ooki ng
at t hose I t hi nk t hat answer s t he quest i on.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: But i t doesn' t , because
we don' t wor k i n a vacuum. We wor k i n a cont ext .
MR. J AKES: Yes.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: And so i t begs t he
quest i on, because we go ar ound i n a ci r cl e: What does
" pr ocess" mean i n a pat ent l aw t hat was passed i n 1952
t hat had one set of manuf act ur i ng and ot her i t ems t hat
ar e t echnol ogi cal l y t i ed and t hi s i s not ? So how do we
di scer n Congr ess' s i nt ent , ot her t han by t he use of t he
20
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
wor d " pr ocess" i n cont ext ?
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk t hat " pr ocess" i s not by
i t sel f . I t says " any new and usef ul pr ocess. " And so
we have - - we can l ook at t hose wor ds and under st and
t hat nat ur al phenomena, l aws of nat ur e, whi ch ar e not
r eal l y new because t hey ar e par t of t he st or ehouse of
knowl edge avai l abl e t o ever yone, and " usef ul , " meani ng
t her e has t o be a pr act i cal appl i cat i on.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: But t he wor d " knowl edge"
i s not used i n t her e. So i t ' s not j ust usef ul
knowl edge.
MR. J AKES: No.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: I t ' s usef ul knowl edge i n
r el at i onshi p t o somet hi ng.
MR. J AKES: Pr act i cal l y appl i ed, yes, i n t he
r eal wor l d, whet her t hat ' s t he exchange of i nf or mat i on
or el ect r oni c dat a t r ansf or mat i on. One of t he pr obl ems
wi t h t he t r ansf or mat i on t est i s t hat i t woul d excl ude
some val uabl e i nvent i ons t hat I t hi nk ever yone woul d
agr ee ar e t echnol ogi cal under any t est such as dat a
compr essi on, such as FM r adi o. Even Bel l ' s cl ai m, t he
cl ai mt o t r ansmi t t i ng sound usi ng undul at i ng cur r ent ,
woul dn' t necessar i l y pass t he t r ansf or mat i on t est . So I
t hi nk we need t o l ook at - -
J USTI CE KENNEDY: But i t woul d be di f f er ent ,
21
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
i t seems t o me, t han what you ar e - - l et ' s assume you
can' t pat ent an al phabet . I assume t hat i s t r ue. And
you can t ake an al phabet t o make beaut i f ul wor ds, and - -
and so f or t h. You - - you want t o say t hat t hese - -
t hese el ect r oni c si gnal s can be used i n a way j ust l i ke
t he al phabet can be used.
And many of t he sci ent i f i c br i ef s say t hat
t hei r pr ocess i s di f f er ent , t hat t hey ar e t aki ng
el ect r oni c si gnal s and t ur ni ng t hemi nt o some ot her sor t
of si gnal . But t hat ' s not what you ar e doi ng.
MR. J AKES: That may be, but t hose si gnal s
coul d al so be t r ansmi t t ed. On - - on your quest i on about
t he al phabet you sai d l ook at t he Mor se cl ai m5, whi ch
was an al phabet t o Mor se Code. That ' s exact l y what i t
was.
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: So you r ej ect - - you
r ej ect t he subst i t ut e. You t hi nk you can pat ent an
al phabet because i t i s a pr ocess of f or mi ng wor ds.
MR. J AKES: I t coul d be, yes. Now, I t hi nk
you r un i nt o al l ki nds of ot her pr obl ems. And t hat ' s
r eal l y wher e t he f ocus of t he pat ent st at ut e shoul d be,
so t hat we have t he f ai r gi ve- and- t ake, t he bar gai n t hat
i s necessar y, t hat we - - t oo much over pat ent i ng as
opposed t o t oo l i t t l e. The t est t her e i s obvi ousness.
That ' s wher e i t t akes pl ace, not at t hi s t hr eshol d.
22
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Mor se' s Code was not
obvi ous.
MR. J AKES: What i s t hat ?
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Mor se' s Code was not
obvi ous, and yet - -
MR. J AKES: No, i t wasn' t .
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: As I under st and t hat
case, t he onl y t hi ng pat ent ed was t he use of hi s code
wi t h r espect t o t he t el egr aph machi ne t hat he pr oposed.
The Pat ent Of f i ce r ej ect ed - - maybe I amr eadi ng t he
case wr ong, but i t r ej ect ed al l of t he cl ai ms except
t hose t hat r el at ed t o t he use of t he code wi t h a
par t i cul ar machi ne.
MR. J AKES: I t - - i t does say used i n
connect i on wi t h t el egr aphy.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Of hi s cl ai ms - -
MR. J AKES: Yes.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: - - t hat was t he onl y one
t hat was accept ed, cor r ect ?
MR. J AKES: Ri ght .
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: The same t hi ng wi t h - -
wel l , Bel l ' s pat ent was - -
MR. J AKES: I n Mor se' s cl ai ms, I bel i eve i t
was cl ai m8 was t he one t hat was r ej ect ed, and t he r est
of t hemwer e accept ed. Cl ai m8 was t he ver y br oad cl ai m
23
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
t o t r ansmi t t i ng i nf or mat i on over a di st ance, however
accompl i shed.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Let ' s not ski p over
t hat , because t he r est of t he cl ai mi n Bel l r el at ed t o
how t o t r ansmi t over t he wi r e, cor r ect ?
MR. J AKES: Hi s di scl osur e di d, but hi s
act ual cl ai mwas i nt er pr et ed as bei ng usi ng undul at i ng
cur r ent t o t r ansmi t sound, however t hat was
accompl i shed. I t was ver y br oad, and t hat ' s why - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: And t hat was what was
r ej ect ed.
MR. J AKES: No. Bel l ' s cl ai mwas not
r ej ect ed. That one was appr oved, yes. The Mor se cl ai m,
cl ai m8, was t he br oad cl ai mt hat r eal l y we woul d
pr obabl y l ook at t oday as bei ng - - as havi ng i nadequat e
di scl osur e because - -
J USTI CE SCALI A: Wel l , i t was - - i t was
t r ansf or mi ng sound i nt o el ect r i cal cur r ent and t hen at
t he ot her end el ect r i cal cur r ent back i nt o sound. I
mean i t met t he t r ansf or mat i on t est , di dn' t i t ?
MR. J AKES: I t mi ght have. I t mi ght have.
J USTI CE SCALI A: I t cl ear l y di d.
MR. J AKES: Wel l , i t ' s not t hat cl ear f r om
t he Feder al Ci r cui t ' s t r ansf or mat i on t est whet her t hat
woul d appl y or not , because al t hough t he Feder al Ci r cui t
24
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
has sai d t r ansf or mat i on of dat a mi ght qual i f y, i t sai d
i t has t o r epr esent somet hi ng physi cal , somet hi ng - - a
r eal obj ect . And sound doesn' t necessar i l y have t o be
t hat . Sound can be gener at ed ar t i f i ci al l y. So - -
J USTI CE SCALI A: Sound - - sound i s not
physi cal , and el ect r i c cur r ent i s not physi cal ?
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk el ect r i c cur r ent i s
physi cal .
J USTI CE SCALI A: Yes, I t hi nk so.
MR. J AKES: Yes.
J USTI CE SCALI A: Sound i s, t oo.
MR. J AKES: I t can be, but when i t ' s
t r ansmi t t ed over a wi r e, i t ' s not . I t ' s somet hi ng el se.
I t ' s an el ect r i cal cur r ent t hen.
J USTI CE SCALI A: Sound i s not t r ansmi t t ed
over t he wi r es. Sound has been t r ansf or med i nt o
cur r ent , and cur r ent i s t r ansmi t t ed over t he wi r e and
t hen t r ansf or med back at t he ot her end i nt o sound.
MR. J AKES: Yes, and I woul d agr ee - -
J USTI CE SCALI A: I t hi nk i t cl ear l y - -
cl ear l y woul d have been cover ed by - - by t he t est t he
gover nment - -
MR. J AKES: I t hi nk t hat ' s mor e i n t he
nat ur e of t r ansmi ssi on, much l i ke our dat a t r ansmi ssi on.
You mi ght t r ansmi t dat a i n a packet wi t hout act ual l y
25
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
changi ng t he under l yi ng dat a, and t hat shoul d be al l owed
as wel l .
I f t her e ar e no quest i ons, I wi l l r eser ve
t he r est of my t i me. Thank you.
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: Thank you, Mr .
J akes.
Mr . St ewar t .
ORAL ARGUMENT OF MALCOLM L. STEWART
ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT
MR. STEWART: Mr . Chi ef J ust i ce, and may i t
pl ease t he Cour t :
Let me st ar t by f ol l owi ng up on t he
di scussi on of t he Mor se and t he t el ephone cases, because
i t ' s cer t ai nl y our vi ew t hat t hose woul d come out t he
same way under our t est as - - as t hey act ual l y di d i n
pr act i ce.
J USTI CE SCALI A: I cer t ai nl y hope so.
MR. STEWART: And you know, J ust i ce Scal i a,
you ment i oned how t o wi n f r i ends and i nf l uence peopl e.
I t hi nk at a cer t ai n l evel of gener al i t y you coul d
descr i be bot h Dal e Car negi e and Al exander Gr ahamBel l as
peopl e who devi sed met hods of communi cat i ng mor e
ef f ect i vel y.
The r eason t hat Bel l ' s met hod was pat ent abl e
was t hat i t oper at ed i n t he r eal mof t he physi cal . Bel l
26
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
had devi sed a pr ocess i mpl ement ed t hr ough machi nes by
whi ch sound was t r ansf or med i nt o el ect r oni c cur r ent .
The cur r ent was t hen t r ansmi t t ed over a di st ance and
t r ansf or med back i nt o sound.
I nnovat i ons as t o new t echni ques of publ i c
speaki ng, new t echni ques of negot i at i ons, t echni ques
t hat go t o t he subst ance of what i s sai d may be
i nnovat i ve. They may be val uabl e. They ar e not pat ent
el i gi bl e because t hey don' t deal i n t he r eal mof t he
physi cal - -
So whi l e t he i ndust r i al pr ocesses t hat we
di scussed at some l engt h i n our br i ef wer e at t he t i me
of t he f r ami ng t he par adi gmat i c pat ent el i gi bl e
pr ocesses, t hey wer e - - t hey ar e not t he onl y pr ocesses
t hat can be pat ent ed.
J USTI CE ALI TO: Near - - near t he end of your
br i ef you ar gue t hat - - t hat t he pat ent her e i s - - i s
not - - i s unpat ent abl e on t he i ndependent gr ound t hat i t
woul d pr eempt t he abst r act i dea of hedgi ng consumpt i on
- - consumpt i on r i sk. I f you - - i f you ar e r i ght about
t hat , i s t hi s a good case f or us t o get i nt o t he - - i nt o
t he ver y br oad i ssue t hat Pet i t i oner has r ai sed?
MR. STEWART: I - - I t hi nk we woul d
cer t ai nl y pr ef er t o wi n on our pr i mar y gr ound, and l et
me say a coupl e of t hi ngs about t hat . Fi r st , we woul d
27
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
f ai r l y vi gor ousl y r esi st t he not i on t hat t he r ul e t hat
was announced by t he Feder al ci r cui t i s r i gi d or
i nf l exi bl e. That i s, al l t hat t he Feder al ci r cui t has
r eal l y sai d i s t hat t o have a pat ent - el i gi bl e pr ocess
you have t o i dent i f y some l i nk t o a machi ne or a
t r ansf or mat i on of mat t er . And t he Feder al ci r cui t has
sai d wi t h r espect t o some pr ocesses t he l i nk t o t he
machi ne may be so at t enuat ed, t he machi ne par t of t he
pr ocess may be such a smal l segment of t he pr ocess as a
whol e, t hat t hi s woul dn' t be enough. But t he Feder al
ci r cui t sai d: We l eave f or anot her day t he har d
quest i ons t hat wi l l ar i se when par t of t he pr ocess i s
machi ne- i mpl ement ed and anot her par t i s not .
And i n or der f or t he PTO and t he Feder al
ci r cui t t o go about t he busi ness of devi si ng mor e
pr eci se r ul es as t o when par t i cul ar l i nks t o machi nes
ar e suf f i ci ent t o cr eat e pat ent el i gi bi l i t y, we f i r st
need t o est abl i sh t he - - t he basi c pr i nci pl e t hat some
l i nk t o a machi ne or t r ansf or mat i on i s necessar y. So I
t hi nk we - - we have made t he al t er nat i ve ar gument i n our
br i ef , and I t hi nk i t i s a basi s f or af f i r mance.
But i f t he Cour t deci ded t he case on t hat
basi s, we woul d l ose at l east t he - - t he l i mi t ed cl ar i t y
t hat t he Feder al ci r cui t ' s opi ni on has pr ovi ded; t hat
i s, i t woul d st i l l be open t o peopl e i n t he f ut ur e t o
28
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
devi se new cont r act ual ar r angement s desi gned t o al l ocat e
r i sks, new met hods of t eachi ng ant i t r ust , and - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: How about i f we say
somet hi ng as si mpl e as pat ent l aw doesn' t cover busi ness
mat t er s i nst ead of what t he Feder al ci r cui t has begun t o
say, whi ch i s t echnol ogy i s t i ed t o a machi ne or a
t r ansf or mat i on of t he subst ance, but I have no i dea what
t he l i mi t s of t hat r ul i ng wi l l i mpose i n t he comput er
wor l d, i n t he bi omedi cal wor l d, al l of t he ami ci who ar e
t al ki ng about how i t wi l l dest r oy i ndust r i es? I f we ar
unsur e about t hat , woul dn' t t he saf er pr act i ce be si mpl y
t o say i t doesn' t i nvol ve busi ness met hods?
MR. STEWART: I t hi nk t hat woul d be
i ncor r ect , and i t woul d cr eat e pr obl ems of i t s own.
That i s, t he - - t he i nnovat i on t hat was hel d t o be
pat ent el i gi bl e i n St at e St r eet Bank was not a pr ocess.
The Feder al ci r cui t was not const r ui ng t he st at ut or y
t er m" pr ocess. " I t was const r ui ng t he st at ut or y t er m
" machi ne. " And i t sai d, i n essence, a comput er t hat has
been pr ogr ammed t o per f or mvar i ous cal cul at i ons i n
connect i on wi t h t he oper at i on of t hi s busi ness i s a
machi ne.
I t went on t o say t he opposi ng par t y i n t hat
case had not r ai sed any obj ect i on under sect i on 102 or
103, and, t her ef or e, t he Feder al ci r cui t - -
29
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: No r ul i ng i n t hi s case
i s goi ng t o change St at e St r eet . I t wasn' t l ooki ng at
pr ocess or t he meani ng of " pr ocess. " I t was l ooki ng at
somet hi ng el se.
MR. STEWART: Wel l , agai n, I t hi nk t hat t he
i nvent i on t hat was hel d t o be pat ent el i gi bl e i n St at e
St r eet i s commonl y descr i bed as a busi ness met hod, even
t hough i t was hel d t o be pat ent el i gi bl e as a machi ne
r at her t han as a pr ocess.
So t o say t hat busi ness met hods ar e
cat egor i cal l y i nel i gi bl e f or pat ent pr ot ect i on woul d
el i mi nat e new machi nes, i ncl udi ng pr ogr ammed comput er s,
t hat ar e usef ul because of t hei r cont r i but i ons t o t he
oper at i on of busi nesses. And si mi l ar l y, t he cour t - -
t he Feder al Ci r cui t i n ot her cases has hel d t hat a cl ai m
t o new and i nnovat i ve comput er sof t war e may be hel d
pat ent abl e as a pr ocess, as a met hod of accompl i shi ng
par t i cul ar t asks t hr ough t he use of a comput er and t hose
mi ght be busi ness- r el at ed t asks. So t o say t hat
busi ness met hods wer e r ul ed out woul d i t sel f be a f ai r l y
sweepi ng hol di ng.
J USTI CE SCALI A: Al so you coul d say busi ness
met hods apar t f r ommachi nes ar e not pat ent abl e. How
about t hat ?
MR. STEWART: I f t he Cour t sai d t hat i n t he
30
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
l i mi t ed ar ea of busi ness met hods, i f t her e i s no machi ne
or t r ansf or mat i on t her e i s no pat ent el i gi bi l i t y - -
J USTI CE BREYER: Suppose you say t hi s. I ' m
j ust sor t of t est i ng t hi ngs out . St ar t wi t h Di ehr . I
mean, and Di ehr has t hese wor ds i n i t , si mi l ar wor ds, i t
j ust says e. g. - - ar e you f ol l owi ng me?
MR. STEWART: Yes.
J USTI CE BREYER: Now, you say what i s i t
t hey have done i n t hi s case i n t he Feder al Ci r cui t ?
They have pul l ed back. That ' s a move. That ' s a move.
They pul l ed back i nsof ar as t hey ar e pul l i ng back f r om
busi ness met hods, not machi nes, dah, dah, dah, dah, dah.
Okay, we see no pr obl emwi t h t hat .
Now, t hey have l ef t much unr esol ved. One,
t r ansf or mat i on; how br oad or nar r ow i s t hat ? We don' t
know. Many peopl e' s pr obl ems wi l l be sol ved i f i t ' s
br oad on t he one hand or nar r ow i n t he ot her .
Two, ar e you aut omat i cal l y pat ent ed - - i n
t he pat ent st at ut e, i f you j ust sor t of r educe t hi s t o a
machi ne by addi ng a comput er on at t he end? They' ve
f l agged t hat as a pr obl em. They haven' t answer ed i t .
Coul d t her e ever be a si t uat i on wher e i t doesn' t meet
t hi s t est but st i l l i s pat ent abl e? We ar e not sur e.
MR. STEWART: Let me t ake t hose poi nt s - -
J USTI CE BREYER: Do you see what I ' mt r yi ng
31
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
t o do? I ' mt r yi ng t o not e t he t hi ngs t hat have been
r ai sed i n t hese 80 br i ef s, i nsof ar as possi bl e say t her e
i s a l ot t her e f or t he f ut ur e t hat we can' t r eal l y
deci de but say as a pul l back, okay.
MR. STEWART: Let me addr ess t hose poi nt s i n
or der . The f i r st t hi ng i s t hat i n Di ehr when you had
t he e. g. ci t e, i t was " e. g. t r ansf or mi ng an ar t i cl e i nt o
a di f f er ent " st at e of - - st at e or t hi ng. And I t hi nk
t he obvi ous i nf er ence i s " e. g. " was used because t he
ot her pr ong of t he machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est i s use
as a machi ne. That i s, i n t he cont ext of Mr . Mor se' s
i nvent i on or Mr . Bel l ' s i nvent i on, t her e i s
t r ansf or mat i on of a sor t , but i t woul dn' t nat ur al l y be
char act er i zed as t r ansf or mat i on of mat t er .
Those t hi ngs wer e hel d t o be pat ent el i gi bl e
not because t hey t r ansf or med mat t er , but because t hey
i nvol ved t he use of a machi ne. And so, what t he Cour t
i n Di ehr sai d t r ansf or mat i on of a mat t er or an ar t i cl e
i nt o a di f f er ent st at e or t hi ng i s t he cl ue t o t he
pat ent abi l i t y of a pr ocess t hat doesn' t i nvol ve a
par t i cul ar machi ne.
And t he - - t he t ype of pr ocess i t had i n
mi nd was t he pr ocess t hat was descr i bed i n Cor ni ng v.
Bur den or t he pr ocess i n Cochr ane v. Deener , si t uat i ons
i n whi ch an i ndi vi dual had devi sed a met hod of , i n one
32
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
sense - - one case, i t was manuf act ur i ng f l our , and i n
anot her case i t was r ol l i ng puddl e bowl s, of
manuf act ur i ng i t ems. And t hat per son sai d, her e i s t he
ser i es of st eps t hat you have t o go t hr ough, but i t i s
not essent i al t hat you use any par t i cul ar t ool or
machi ne f or each of t hese st eps. That was why t he
wor d - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: Mr . St ewar t , I
t hought I under st ood your ar gument up unt i l t he ver y
l ast f oot not e i n your br i ef . And you say t hi s i s not - -
si mpl y t he met hod i sn' t pat ent abl e because i t doesn' t
i nvol ve a machi ne. But t hen you say but i t mi ght be i f
you use a comput er t o i dent i f y t he par t i es t hat you ar e
set t i ng a pr i ce bet ween and i f you used a mi cr opr ocessor
t o cal cul at e t he pr i ce. That ' s l i ke sayi ng i f you use a
t ypewr i t er t o t ype out t he - - t he pr ocess t hen i t i s
pat ent abl e. I - - I - - i t - - t hat t akes away ever yt hi ng
t hat you spent 53 pages est abl i shi ng.
MR. STEWART: Wel l , I guess t her e - - t her e
wer e t wo di f f er ent pl aces, I bel i eve, at whi ch we
i dent i f i ed ways i n whi ch t hi s sor t of hedgi ng scheme
mi ght be made pat ent el i gi bl e. The f i r st i s we
descr i bed a hypot het i cal i nt er act i ve websi t e i n whi ch
peopl e - - par t i es and count er par t i es coul d essent i al l y
f i nd each ot her by t he comput er and coul d agr ee t o t er ms
33
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on t hat basi s. And i n t hat si t uat i on, t he - - t he
comput er woul d be at t he hear t of t he i nnovat i on. I t
woul d be - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: No, no. That ' s j ust
sayi ng i nst ead of l ooki ng at t he - - i n t he Yel l ow Pages,
you l ook on t he comput er ; and t hat makes al l t he
di f f er ence t o you?
MR. STEWART: I t hi nk an - - an i nt er act i ve
comput er t echni que, one i n whi ch you si gn on and can
f i nd peopl e wi t hout t r acki ng t hemdown speci f i cal l y, can
si mpl y i dent i f y your sel f on t he websi t e as somebody
whose i nt er est ed i n engagi ng i n a par t i cul ar t r ansact i on
and a pot ent i al count er par t y can f i nd you, i s di f f er ent
f r omt he Yel l ow Pages.
But I guess t he f undament al poi nt I woul d
make i s - - and t hi s i s r eal l y r esponsi ve t o t he second
par t of J ust i ce Br eyer ' s quest i on - - I t hi nk i t i s bot h
a vi r t ue and a vi ce of t he t est t hat t he Feder al Ci r cui t
has announced and t hat we ar e advocat i ng t hat i t doesn' t
sol ve al l t he har d quest i ons. That i s, t he Feder al
Ci r cui t has sai d si nce t hi s par t i cul ar pat ent appl i cant
di dn' t i dent i f y any machi ne or any t r ansf or mat i on t hat
woul d be necessar y t o t he accompl i shment of i t s met hod,
t hat per son i s out of l uck, and t her ef or e, i t ' s
i nappr opr i at e f or us t o go on t o deci de ki nd of t he
34
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pr eci se l evel of subst ant i al i t y t hat a
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on must pl ay - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: But i f you l ook at
your f oot not e, t hat i nvol ves t he most t angent i al and
i nsi gni f i cant use of a machi ne. And yet you say t hat
mi ght be enough t o t ake somet hi ng f r ompat ent abi l i t y t o
not pat ent abl e.
MR. STEWART: And al l we' ve sai d i s t hat i t
mi ght be enough; t hat i s, har d quest i ons wi l l ar i se down
t he r oad as t o wher e do you dr aw t he l i ne, t o what
ext ent must t he machi ne or t he t r ansf or mat i on be
cent r al - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: So you t hi nk i t ' s a
har d quest i on. I f you devel op a pr ocess t hat says l ook
t o t he hi st or i cal aver ages of oi l consumpt i on over a
cer t ai n per i od and di vi de i t by 2, t hat pr ocess woul d
not be pat ent abl e. But i f you say use a cal cul at or ,
t hen i t - - t hen i t i s?
MR. STEWART: I t hi nk i f i t ' s si mpl y usi ng a
cal cul at or f or i t s pr eexi st i ng f unct i onal i t y t o cr unch
number s, ver y l i kel y t hat woul d not be enough. But what
we see i n some anal ogous ar eas i s t hat t he comput er wi l l
be pr ogr ammed wi t h new sof t war e, i t wi l l be gi ven
f unct i onal i t y i t di dn' t have bef or e i n or der t o al l ow i t
t o per f or ma ser i es of cal cul at i ons, and t hat get s
35
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
cl oser t o t he l i ne. And agai n - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: Wel l , your
f oot not e - - I don' t mean t o dwel l on i t - - i t says t o
i dent i f y count er par t i es t o t he t r ansact i ons. So t hat i f
what you' r e t r yi ng t o get i s t he - - t he baker who sel l s
br ead, because you ar e goi ng t o hook hi mup wi t h t he
gr ocer who sel l s, you know, i n t he gr ocer y st or e, i f you
punched i n i n your sear ch st at i on, you know, gi ve me al l
t he baker s i n Washi ngt on, t hat woul d make i t pat ent abl e?
MR. STEWART: Agai n, we ar e - - we ar e not
sayi ng i t woul d be pat ent el i gi bl e. We woul d have t o
r evi ew t hose f act s, and t he PTO woul d have t o r evi ew
t hose f act s i n t he cont ext of an act ual appl i cat i on.
I guess t he poi nt I ' mt r yi ng t o make i s
si mpl y t hat we don' t want t he Cour t , f or i nst ance, i n
t he ar ea of sof t war e i nnovat i ons or medi cal di agnost i c
t echni ques t o be t r yi ng t o use t hi s case as t he vehi cl e
f or i dent i f yi ng t he ci r cumst ances i n whi ch i nnovat i ons
of t hat sor t woul d and woul d not be pat ent el i gi bl e,
because t he case r eal l y doesn' t pr esent any - - any
quest i on r egar di ng t hose t echnol ogi es. And t her ef or e,
we - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Now, i f i t veer s t he
ot her way, whi ch i s by sayi ng t hat we excl usi vel y r el y
on t he machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est , t hat we' r e
36
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pr ecl udi ng appl i cat i ons of t he pat ent l aw i n t hose
f i el ds, t he t hi ngs we can' t i magi ne. Once you announce
an excl usi ve t est , you' r e shoe- hor ni ng t echnol ogi es t hat
mi ght be di f f er ent .
MR. STEWART: I guess I woul d say a coupl e
of di f f er ent t hi ngs. The f i r st i s t hat i t seems
unl i kel y, even wi t h new and r api dl y emer gi ng
t echnol ogi es, t hat somebody woul d come up wi t h a syst em
t hat seems f or pat ent pur poses anal ogous t o t he
i nvent i ons t hat have been pat ent el i gi bl e i n t he past
t hat di dn' t i nvol ve any machi ne and t hat di dn' t i nvol ve
any t r ansf or mat i on.
Havi ng sai d t hat , I woul d not e t hat i n bot h
Benson and i n Fl ook t he Cour t hel d open t he possi bi l i t y
t hat some unf or eseen event coul d t ake pl ace t hat
woul d - - as t o whi ch t he appl i cat i on woul d be pat ent
el i gi bl e, even t hough t he machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on
t est - -
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: So hel p us wi t h a t est
t hat doesn' t go t o t he ext r eme t he Feder al Ci r cui t di d,
whi ch i s t o pr ecl ude any ot her i t ems, somet hi ng we hel d
open expl i ci t l y i n t wo ot her cases, so we woul d have t o
backt r ack and say now we ar e r ul i ng t hat we wer e wr ong,
and st i l l get at somet hi ng l i ke t hi s?
MR. STEWART: Wel l , I t hi nk t he Cour t coul d
37
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
say - - coul d do essent i al l y what was done i n Benson and
Fl ook, namel y acknowl edge t hat t her e had never been a
case up t o t hi s poi nt i n whi ch a pr ocess had been hel d
pat ent el i gi bl e t hat di dn' t i nvol ve a machi ne or a
t r ansf or mat i on. I t coul d l eave open t he possi bi l i t y
t hat some new and as yet unf or eseen t echnol ogy coul d
necessi t at e t he cr eat i on of an except i on.
But - - and t he poi nt we woul d al so make i s
t hi s seems t o be a ver y unl i kel y candi dat e f or such an
except i on, because t he hedgi ng met hod t hat Pet i t i oner s
have - - f or whi ch t hey have sought a pat ent i s i n no
sense di f f er ent i n ki nd f r omr i sk management t echni ques
t hat have been under t aken f or cent ur i es.
J USTI CE SOTOMAYOR: Wel l , t hat - - t hat goes
back t o, not 101 but 102 and 103. That goes back t o
obvi ousness or t he st andar d weedi ng mechani sms f or
pat ent .
MR. STEWART: Wel l , t hi s may or may not be a
novel or nonobvi ous met hod. But even i f we assume t hat
t hi s i s obvi ous f or pur poses of Sect i on 103, i n t hat i t
r epr esent as suf f i ci ent advance over t he pr i or ar t , t hat
peopl e ski l l ed i n t he ar t woul d not necessar i l y have
come up wi t h i t , i t st i l l i s a di f f er ent i n ki nd f r om
r i sk management t echni ques t hat have t aken pl ace i n t hi s
count r y f or - - f or 200 year s. I t i s - - i t i s - -
38
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: Mr . St ewar t , di d you - -
does t he gover nment put f or war d t hi s
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est ? Was t hat your t est , or
was i t t he Feder al ci r cui t ' s on i t s own?
MR. STEWART: The Feder al ci r cui t , sua
spont e, set t he case f or hear i ng en banc. I bel i eve t he
case had been ar gued t o a panel , but had not been
deci ded, and t he Feder al ci r cui t set t he case f or
r ear gument en banc, posed a number of quest i ons t o
t he - - t he par t i es and t he gover nment di d advocat e t he
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est .
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: Tel l me what - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: I ' msor r y. Di d or
di d not ?
MR. STEWART: Di d, i t di d advocat e t he
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on.
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: You di d - - and i f you
r ead J udge Mayer ' s opi ni on, i t has a si mpl i ci t y t o i t .
I t says, i f i t ' s t echnol ogy, t hen i t s wi t hi n t he r eal m
of pat ent , and i f i t ' s not t echnol ogy, i t i sn' t , i f i t
i s based on sci ence or t echnol ogy, and t hat seems t o be
what i s used i n ot her pl aces.
MR. STEWART: I don' t know t hat our t est s - -
I t hi nk our t est , i n a sense, has a shor t hand ver si on of
t hat . I don' t know t hat f ocusi ng t he i nqui r y di r ect l y
39
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
on whet her t echnol ogy i s i nvol ved woul d make t he i nqui r y
easi er , and t hat i s so f or t wo r easons.
Fi r st , peopl e coul d di sput e whet her
par t i cul ar advances ar e pr oper l y r egar ded as
t echnol ogi cal advances, and second, we woul d st i l l have
t he di f f i cul t pr obl ems t hat t he Chi ef J ust i ce has
r ef er r ed t o, wher e you have a pr ocess t hat i s descr i bed
as i nvol vi ng t echnol ogy at some st ep al ong t he way, and
cour t s wi l l st i l l have t o make t he det er mi nat i on, i s
t hat suf f i ci ent l y subst ant i al st ep t o make t he pr ocess,
as a whol e, a t echnol ogi cal one.
So I don' t t hi nk t hat , by adopt i ng a
t echnol ogi cal ar t s t est , t he Cour t woul d avoi d t he
di f f i cul t i es t hat i t has appr opr i at el y i dent i f i ed wi t h
t he machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est . The ot her t hi ng I
woul d say about t he machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est i s
t hi s i s not a gover nment posi t i on of r ecent vi nt age;
t hat i s, t he gover nment ' s br i ef t o t hi s cour t i n
Got t schal k v. Benson, or i t s r epl y br i ef whi ch was f i l ed
ar ound 1971, basi cal l y sai d t hat , al t hough t hi s Cour t
has never announced machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on of t he
t est , t hat i s t he pr i nci pl e t hat can be abst r act ed f r om
t he t ot al i t y of t he Cour t ' s deci si ons.
J USTI CE KENNEDY: Was t he St at e St r eet case
a machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est ?
40
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. STEWART: I t woul d.
J USTI CE KENNEDY: You t al k about t he St at e
St r eet case i n your br i ef , and i t ' s compl i cat ed because
of t he Feder al st at ut e t hat f ol l ows i t , but i f you had
j ust t he f act s of St at e St r eet bef or e us, and f or get t i ng
t he Feder al st at ut e was enact ed af t er i t , how woul d you
deci de t hi s case?
MR. STEWART: Oh, i t woul d come out t he same
way. I mean, St at e St r eet Bank - -
J USTI CE KENNEDY: That ' s what I t hought .
And i s i t - - i s i t machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on, i n your
vi ew?
MR. STEWART: Wel l , i t was machi ne - - t hat
i s, i n St at e St r eet Bank, t he cl ai mwas not t o a pr ocess
wi t hi n t he meani ng of Sect i on 101. The cl ai mwas not t o
a met hod of accompl i shi ng t hi ngs by means of a comput er ,
whi ch woul d be, pot ent i al l y, a pr ocess. I t was t o t he
comput er i t sel f , t he pr ogr ammed comput er , t hat t he
i nnovat i on i n St at e St r eet Bank was t hat t he devi si ng of
new comput er pr ogr ams t hat al l owed t he comput er t o
per f or mvar i ous t asks i n associ at i on wi t h t he car r yi ng
out of t he hub- and- spokes i nvest ment - - i nvest ment
met hod. And, cer t ai nl y - -
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: So what di d t hat - -
what di d t hat t r ansf or m?
41
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
MR. STEWART: I t di dn' t t r ansf or manyt hi ng,
but i t woul d f i t - - t he t r ansf or mat i on par t woul d be
i r r el evant because t he machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est
i s, i n our vi ew, t he appr opr i at e r ubr i c t o appl y i n
const r ui ng t he st at ut or y t er mpr ocess, t hat i s, when t he
per son doesn' t say, I have i nvent ed a new machi ne, but ,
r at her , says, I ' ve i dent i f i ed a new pr ocess f or
accompl i shi ng t hi ngs.
I f a per son cl ai ms t o be - - t o have i nvent ed
a new machi ne, t hen t hat - - i t i s ei t her a machi ne or i t
i sn' t . A comput er i s cer t ai nl y a machi ne. Real l y, t he
onl y - - I t hi nk t he - -
J USTI CE STEVENS: I don' t under st and how
t hat can be a pat ent on a machi ne i f t he onl y t hi ng
novel i s t he pr ocess t hat t he machi ne i s usi ng.
I sn' t - - i sn' t t he quest i on - - r eal l y, t he quest i on
t her e was whet her t he new pr ocess was pat ent abl e.
MR. STEWART: Wel l , I t hi nk what - - t he
ar gument t hat t he ot her si de, t he per son chal l engi ng t he
pat ent i n St at e St r eet coul d have made, but appar ent l y
di dn' t , was t he per son coul d have sai d, of cour se, t he
comput er i s a machi ne, but a comput er pr ogr ammed wi t h
new sof t war e t o per f or mdi f f er ent f unct i ons i s not a new
machi ne.
I t ' s not a di f f er ent machi ne f r omt he one
42
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
t hat has al ways - - not al ways, but t hat has al r eady
exi st ed, and t her ef or e, i t doesn' t sat i sf y Sect i on 1 or
Sect i on - - 102 or Sect i on 103, but t hat - -
J USTI CE KENNEDY: Wel l , t hat was one of t he
r easons I asked you about i t , I suppose. J ust l ooki ng
at t he whol e case, do you t hi nk t he St at e St r eet
hol di ng - - t he St at e St r eet i nvent i on was pat ent abl e?
MR. STEWART: I t was - - t he way I woul d put
i t i s: The St at e St r eet Bank anal ysi s of t he quest i on
t hat was act ual l y pr esent ed t o i t was cor r ect ; t hat i s,
t he ar gued was made, t he pr ogr ammed comput er i s
pat ent abl e as a - -
J USTI CE KENNEDY: How woul d you come out i n
t he St at e St r eet case t oday, i f al l of t he ar gument s
wer e made under your t est ?
MR. STEWART: Wel l , under our t est , we woul d
come out t he same way because t he comput er woul d be a
machi ne. The onl y quest i on woul d be whet her t he
pr ogr ammi ng of t he comput er wi t h new sof t war e caused i t
t o be a pat ent abl e di f f er ent machi ne f r omt he one t hat
exi st ed pr evi ousl y.
Now - - now, we do t hi nk t hat sof t war e
i nnovat i ons can have t he ef f ect of causi ng t he comput er
t o be a di f f er ent , speci al pur pose comput er , as t he
phr ase - -
43
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
J USTI CE STEVENS: I ' msor r y. I must be
awf ul l y st upi d. You say i t woul d come out t he same way.
I n t he same way t he cour t di d or t hi s way you ar gued?
MR. STEWART: I t hi nk t he same - - t he
Feder al ci r cui t ' s deci si on i n St at e St r eet woul d come
out t he same way under our t est .
J USTI CE STEVENS: And you t hi nk i t shoul d?
You t hi nk i t shoul d?
MR. STEWART: Yes, but , agai n, t he poi nt I
woul d emphasi ze - -
J USTI CE STEVENS: I don' t under st and why
t hat i sn' t j ust t he appl i cat i on of a pr ocess, whi ch - -
whi ch i s not i t sel f pat ent abl e subj ect mat t er , t o a
par t i cul ar machi ne t hat can use pr ocess - -
J USTI CE KENNEDY: That ' s - - t hat ' s a pr obl em
I have.
MR. STEWART: Wel l , I guess - - l et me
backt r ack. I f you l ook at t he t ext of t he st at ut e t hat
i s r epr oduced at Page 2 of - - of t he Bl ue Br i ef , and i t
says - - i t ' s r i ght i n t he mi ddl e of t he page. " Whoever
i nvent s or di scover s any new and usef ul pr ocess,
machi ne, manuf act ur e, or composi t i on of mat t er i s
pot ent i al l y ent i t l ed t o" - -
J USTI CE BREYER: So I t hought you wer e
sayi ng t hat t he cor r ect ar gument f or t he peopl e
44
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
at t acki ng t he pat ent i n t hat case was t o say, t hi s i s
not a machi ne. The machi ne t her e i s a comput er . Thi s
i s a pr ogr amt hat changes swi t ches, and t hat i s a
di f f er ent pr ocess f or t he use of t he machi ne.
Now, whet her t hat pr ocess i s or i s not
pat ent abl e depends upon a l ot of t hi ngs t hat we don' t
have t o go i nt o i n t hi s case. I s t hat r i ght ?
MR. STEWART: I don' t - - no.
J USTI CE BREYER: Okay. Wel l , t hen what i s
r i ght ?
MR. STEWART: I don' t t hi nk t hat ' s what I
saw sayi ng. What I was sayi ng i s t hat - - and I guess
t he - - t he f i r st poi nt I woul d make i s, when somebody
cl ai ms t o have i nvent ed a new machi ne, t he
t r ansf or mat i on t est r eal l y has not hi ng t o do wi t h t he
i nqui r y because a - - a bet t er t el evi si on or a bet t er DVD
pl ayer can be pat ent ed as a machi ne, even t hough
t r ansf or mat i on of mat t er i s no - -
J USTI CE STEVENS: I t ' s not on a comput er ,
whi ch t he onl y di f f er ence f r omt he ol d comput er i s i t ' s
usi ng a new pr ogr am. You can' t say t hat ' s a new
machi ne.
MR. STEWART: Wel l , but my - - I t hi nk - -
f i r st , I t hi nk you can because I t hi nk i f you - - i f you
i mpr oved t he har dwar e of t he comput er i n or der t o enabl e
45
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
i t t o per f or m- -
J USTI CE STEVENS: But t hat pat ent di dn' t
r equi r e any change i n t he har dwar e, as I r emember i t
cor r ect l y.
MR. STEWART: But I - - but I t hi nk t he
ar gument t hat has been made wi t h success - - and PTO
agr ees wi t h t hi s - - i s t hat pr ogr ammi ng a comput er by
means of sof t war e t o pr oduce - - t o per f or mnew f unct i ons
can cr eat e a novel - -
J USTI CE BREYER: But t hen al l we do i s ever y
exampl e t hat I j ust gave, t hat I t hought wer e exampl es
t hat cer t ai nl y woul d not be pat ent ed, you si mpl y pat ent
t hem. Al l you do i s j ust have a set of i nst r uct i ons f or
sayi ng how t o set a comput er t o do i t . Anyone can do
t hat . Now, i t ' s a machi ne.
So al l t he busi ness pat ent s ar e al l r i ght
back i n. Now, t hat - - what I t hi nk we wer e l ooki ng
f or was - - or at l east I was - - was why t hat i sn' t so,
and how you ar e goi ng t o l at er , down t he r oad, deal wi t h
t hi s si t uat i on of al l you do i s you get somebody who
knows comput er s, and you t ur n ever y busi ness pat ent i nt o
a set t i ng of swi t ches on t he machi ne because t her e ar e
no busi nesses t hat don' t use t hose machi nes.
MR. STEWART: Wel l , f i r st of al l t he onl y
r ul i ng t hat we' r e - - backt r ack a bi t , t o say, we oppose,
46
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
si r , i n t hi s case because we r ecogni ze t hat t her e ar e
di f f i cul t pr obl ems out t her e i n t er ms of pat ent abi l i t y
of sof t war e i nnovat i ons and medi cal di agnost i cs.
J USTI CE KENNEDY: You t hought we - - you
t hought we woul d mess i t up.
MR. STEWART: I di dn' t t hi nk - -
( Laught er . )
MR. STEWART: We di dn' t t hi nk t he Cour t
woul d mess i t up. We t hought t hat t hi s case woul d
pr ovi de an unsui t abl e vehi cl e f or r esol vi ng t he har d
quest i ons because t he case doesn' t i nvol ve comput er
sof t war e or medi cal di agnost i c t echni ques, and
t her ef or e, we t hought t he Cour t woul d ar r i ve at t he
posi t i on t hat I t hi nk, at l east some member s ar e f eel i ng
t hat you have ar r i ved at , t hat you wi l l deci de t hi s
case, and most of t he har d quest i ons r emai n unr esol ved.
And, f r ankl y, we t hi nk t hat ' s t r ue.
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: But t hi s case coul d be
deci ded wi t hout maki ng any bol d st eps.
MR. STEWART: Agai n, I don' t - - I don' t
t hi nk i t woul d be a bol d st ep t o say t hat
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on i s t he t est . That i s, we have
gone f or - -
J USTI CE GI NSBURG: But even t he Feder al
ci r cui t di dn' t say i t was a r et est . I t sai d i t i s f or
47
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
now. We know t hat t hi ngs t hat we haven' t yet
cont empl at ed may be ar ound t he cor ner , and when t hey
happen, we wi l l deal wi t h t hem.
MR. STEWART: And we woul d - - we woul d be
ent i r el y cont ent wi t h a r ul i ng l i ke t hat . And we woul d
say t hat t he cl ai med hedgi ng met hod her e i s not t he sor t
of Space Age i nnovat i on t hat mi ght cause J ust i ces t o
say: Thi s i s j ust di f f er ent i n ki nd f r omanyt hi ng t hat
t he dr af t er s of t he pat ent st at ut e coul d have i magi ned.
The ot her poi nt I woul d make about t he
pr ogr ammed comput er i s, t o f ol l ow up on my t el evi si on
and DVD exampl e, t hat when you cl ai ma machi ne or a
manuf act ur e, as t he commi t t ee r epor t s t o t he 1952 act
sai d, t hose wor ds ar e br oad. They encompass ever yt hi ng
under t he sun t hat i s made by man. And so a t el evi si on
i s i ndi sput abl y a machi ne, even t hough i t s f unct i on i s
not t o t r ansf or mmat t er . I t ' s onl y when you get t o t he
t er m" pr ocess" t hat you ar e l ef t wi t h - - t hat t he
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on t est ki cks i n.
And r eal l y, t he ar gument on t he ot her si de
i s: The t er m" pr ocess" i n or di nar y speech i s ext r emel y
br oad. I t can l i t er al l y be r ead t o encompass any ser i es
of st eps, whet her or not l i nked t o t echnol ogy, whet her
or not l i nked t o a machi ne or t r ansf or mat i on. And t he
ot her si de ar gues you shoul d const r ue i t t hat way i n t he
48
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
pat ent st at ut e.
I guess t he - - t he t hr ee r easons we woul d
say t hat ' s not so ar e: Fi r st , under t he canon of
nosci t ur a soci i s, i t i s appr opr i at e t o const r ue t he
t er m" pr ocess" i n conj unct i on wi t h t he ot her t er ms.
Those ot her t er ms ar e br oad, but t hey al l r ef er t o
physi cal obj ect s t hat don' t exi st i n nat ur e and ar e
cr eat ed by man. And a huge ar r ay of ver y pr oduct i ve,
i nnovat i ve act i vi t y doesn' t cul mi nat e i n t he cr eat i on of
any new physi cal subst ance, and t he wor d " pr ocess"
sur el y was i nt ended t o add somet hi ng, but i t woul d be
qui t e st r ange t o const r ue t he wor d " pr ocess" t o
encompass t he whol e r ange of human endeavor when t he
ot her wor ds ar e l i mi t ed t o t he cr eat i on of new t hi ngs i n
t he physi cal .
The second t hi ng i s t hat when t hi s Cour t i n
t he past has expl ai ned t he t er m" pr ocess, " i t ' s al ways
l i nked i t t o t he oper at i on of machi nes, as i n t he
t el ephone cases i n Mor se, or t o t he t r ansf or mat i on of
mat t er i n ways t hat may not be dependent on a par t i cul ar
machi ne.
And t he t hi r d t hi ng I woul d say i s t hat i n a
sense, t her e i s a st r ong dog t hat di dn' t bar k i n t he
ni ght qual i t y t o our ar gument . That i s, even t hough t he
Cour t has never sai d i n so many wor ds t hat a met hod of
49
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
al l ocat i ng r i sk by cont r act i s a pat ent - el i gi bl e
pr ocess, t he economi c hi st or y of t hi s count r y r eal l y
woul d have been f undament al l y di f f er ent i f i t had been
bel i eved f r omt he out set t hat i nnovat i ons of t hi s
char act er coul d be pat ent ed and pot ent i al compet i t or s
coul d be f or ecl osed f r omengagi ng i n t he same met hod.
I f t he Cour t has not hi ng f ur t her ?
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: Thank you, Counsel .
Mr . J akes, you have f our mi nut es r emai ni ng.
REBUTTAL ARGUMENT OF J . MI CHAEL J AKES
ON BEHALF OF THE PETI TI ONER
MR. J AKES: Thank you, Mr . Chi ef J ust i ce.
The Feder al Ci r cui t di d announce t hi s t est
as t he sol e t est f or al l pr ocesses. I t sai d i t appl i ed
no mat t er what t he pr ocess was, so we do have t o f ace
t hese di f f i cul t quest i ons.
I t hi nk t he quest i on can be avoi ded, because
we don' t need a r i gi d t est of t hi s t ype based on
machi ne- or - t r ansf or mat i on. The quest i on we ar e l ooki ng
at and shoul d be l ooki ng at i s: Ar e we t r yi ng t o pat ent
an abst r act i dea?
Now, t he gover nment has gone f ar t her t han
t hat and r eal l y want s t o excl ude met hods of or gani zi ng
human behavi or . I t hi nk t hat ' s t he way t hey descr i be
i t . That ' s r eal l y t he busi ness met hod r ej ect i on i n
50
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
ot her wor ds. And I t hi nk t hat r uns cont r ar y t o sect i on
273 of t he st at ut e, whi ch r ecogni zed t hat t her e wer e
busi ness met hods t hat coul d f al l wi t hi n t he pat ent
st at ut e, and as a r esul t pr i or user r i ght s shoul d be
gr ant ed.
To speak br i ef l y about t he St at e St r eet Bank
case t hat was a t ype of busi ness met hod t hat was
i mpl ement ed on a machi ne. The Feder al Ci r cui t sai d i t
di dn' t mat t er . They wer en' t l ooki ng at whet her i t was
i n machi ne f or mor met hod f or m. Thei r r easoni ng woul d
have appl i ed t he same ei t her way, and t o do ot her wi se
woul d be t o pl ace f or mover subst ance. And i n a sense,
t hat ' s what some of t he t r ansf or mat i on debat e i s about .
I t ' s f or mover subst ance. Why shoul d t r ansf or mat i on be
t he key? The key shoul d be: I s i t a pr act i cal
appl i cat i on of a usef ul r esul t ?
Our met hod, we bel i eve, i s a pr act i cal
appl i cat i on. As t he pat ent of f i ce has sai d, i t does
i nvol ve physi cal st eps. I t hi nk t hat was one of t he
cl ues t hat t he pat ent of f i ce has r el i ed on i n sayi ng
whet her or not somet hi ng i s abst r act . Si nce i t i s not
an abst r act met hod, i t ' s r oot ed i n t he r eal wor l d, we
t hi nk i t shoul d be el i gi bl e t o have i t s exami nat i on at
t he pat ent of f i ce and i t shoul dn' t be t hr own out on an
ar bi t r ar y t est .
51
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: The - - t he physi cal
st ep t hat your pr ocess i nvol ves i s pi cki ng - - pi cki ng up
t he phone and cal l i ng peopl e on bot h si des of t he
t r ansact i on.
MR. J AKES: I t coul d be. I t al so r equi r es
t he sal e of a commodi t y on a f i xed pr i ce. That i s
somet hi ng t hat t akes pl ace i n t he r eal wor l d as opposed
t o a ment al pr ocess wi t hi n somebody' s head. Pur el y
ment al pr ocesses t hat ar e done j ust sol el y i n someone' s
mi nd, I t hi nk we al l agr ee, t hose ar e not
pat ent - el i gi bl e. That ' s not our met hod.
CHI EF J USTI CE ROBERTS: Thank you, Counsel .
The case i s submi t t ed.
( Wher eupon, at 1: 55 p. m. , t he case i n t he
above- ent i t l ed mat t er was submi t t ed. )
52
Official - Subject to Final Review Official - Subject to Final Review
advantages8:19 anybody16:11 43:14 baker11:25
A
advocate9:22 apart30:23 arrangements 36:5
able12:25
15:18 39:10,15 apparatus8:12 29:1 bakers36:9
above-entitled
advocating apparently array49:8 balance19:22
1:16 52:15
34:19 42:20 arrive47:13 20:1
abstract3:24
affirmance APPEARAN... arrived47:15 banc39:6,9
4:6 9:20,25
28:21 1:19 art10:20 11:14 Bank17:19,22
17:24 27:19
afoul10:18 Appendix9:24 38:21,22 29:16 41:9,14
50:21 51:21,22
afternoon3:4 applicable18:9 article17:17 41:19 43:9
abstracted
Age48:7 applicant34:21 32:7,18 51:6
40:22
ago13:19,22 application6:17 artificially25:4 bargain22:22
accepted23:19
agree7:16 13:2 12:19 21:8 arts3:21 4:13 bark49:23
23:25
21:20 25:19 36:13 37:16 4:14,14,19,21 based15:24
accepts19:14
33:25 52:10 44:12 51:16,18 5:3 7:12,14,15 16:13,15 39:21
accommodate
agreed11:16 applications 7:21 8:18 50:18
3:21
agrees46:7 37:1 12:16 40:13 basic28:18
accomplished
Alappat17:18 applied21:15 asked43:5 basically40:20
24:2,9
Alexander 50:14 51:11 asking13:9 basis3:16 12:21
accomplishing
26:21 applies4:6 aspect8:23 28:21,23 34:1
30:17 41:16
ALITO27:16 apply11:5 24:25 18:16 beautiful22:3
42:8
allocate29:1 42:4 association began10:23
accomplishme...
allocating50:1 approach18:21 41:21 beginning18:2
34:23
allow10:20 appropriate assume22:1,2 begs20:20
acknowledge
35:24 42:4 49:4 38:19 begun29:5
38:2
allowed26:1 appropriately assuming6:3 behalf1:20,23
act19:20 48:13
41:20 40:14 attacking45:1 2:4,6,9 3:8
acted5:15
alphabet22:2,3 approved15:17 attenuated28:8 26:9 50:11
acting12:4
22:6,13,14,18 24:13 automatically behavior50:24
active17:10
alternative ar29:10 31:18 believe7:6,25
activities5:18
28:20 arbitrary51:25 available21:7 8:15,17,18
7:21,22
amendments area5:18 20:4,4 averages35:15 23:23 33:20
activity8:7,11
17:10 31:1 36:16 avoid40:13 39:6 51:17
49:9
amici7:9 29:9 areas16:2,4 avoidance5:21 believed50:4
actual11:15
analogous35:22 35:22 5:23,24 Bell24:4 26:21
24:7 36:13
37:9 argue14:7 avoided50:17 26:25
actuarial10:25
analysis4:18 27:17 awake9:3 Bell's21:21
10:25 11:5
43:9 argued39:7 awfully44:2 23:22 24:12
add49:11
announce37:2 43:11 44:3 26:24 32:12
adding31:20
B
50:13 argues48:25 benefit8:10
address32:5
back5:7 6:21
announced28:2 argument1:17 14:13
admired17:9
9:18 17:7 18:2
34:19 40:21 2:2,7 3:4,7 Benson37:14
admit4:24
24:19 25:18
answer8:25 20:7 26:8 38:1 40:19
adopting40:12
27:4 31:10,11
16:19 20:9,12 28:20 33:9 BERNARD1:3
advance19:21
31:11 32:4
answered31:21 42:19 44:25 best16:7
38:21
38:15,15 46:17
answers20:16 46:6 48:20 better45:16,16
advances3:21
backtrack37:23
antitrust9:2 49:24 50:10 bill5:20
40:4,5
44:18 46:25
29:2 arguments Bilski1:3 3:5
advantage8:18
53
Alderson Reporting Company Alderson Reporting Company
biomedical29:9 businessman category12:11 44:5 12:8
bit46:25 6:6,7,15 cause48:7 circumstances complicated
Blue44:19 business-related caused43:19 5:16 36:18 41:3
board20:3 30:19 causing43:23 cite32:7 composition
bold47:19,21 buy10:7 central35:12 cited5:1 44:22
book4:16 buyers10:7 centuries10:16 claim9:24 10:10 compression
borrowing7:10 38:13 10:14 11:12,13 21:21
C
bound4:9 century17:7 21:21,22 22:13 computer29:8
C2:1 3:1
bowls33:2 19:23 23:24,25,25 29:19 30:16,18
calculate33:15
bread36:6 certain5:15 24:4,7,12,13 31:20 33:13,25
calculations
BREYER5:6 26:20 35:16 24:14,14 30:15 34:2,6,9 35:22
29:20 35:25
6:5,20 8:25 9:6 certainly4:21 41:14,15 48:12 41:16,18,18,20
calculator35:17
9:11 19:8 11:6 26:14,17 claimed48:6 41:20 42:11,22
35:20
20:11 31:3,8 27:24 41:23 claims10:20 42:22 43:11,17
calculus10:24
31:25 44:24 42:11 46:12 23:11,16,23 43:19,23,24
call11:25 12:1
45:9 46:10 challenging 42:9 45:14 45:2,19,20,25
13:18
Breyer's34:17 42:19 clarity28:23 46:7,14 47:11
calling52:3
brief16:23 change30:2 classic10:15 48:11
candidate38:9
17:16 27:12,17 46:3 clause7:4 computers
canon49:3
28:21 33:10 changes45:3 clear24:23 13:25 14:2
capacity11:9
40:18,19 41:3 changing26:1 clearly11:3 30:12 46:21
Carnegie26:21
44:19 character50:5 24:22 25:20,21 concerned4:25
carrying41:21
briefly51:6 characterize7:6 close15:24 concrete11:12
carved8:5
briefs22:7 32:2 characterized closer36:1 Congress5:4,7
case3:4 4:3 5:10
bring5:14 32:14 clue32:19 5:10,11,13,15
9:22,22 12:7
brings18:1 charge19:18 clues51:20 8:5 11:7 20:14
14:25 15:2,22
broad3:23 Chief3:3,9 9:23 Cochrane32:24 Congress's
15:24 17:19,22
11:13 13:4 10:14 11:19,24 code22:14 23:1 20:25
17:23 23:8,11
20:14 23:25 22:16 26:5,10 23:4,8,12 conjunction
27:21 28:22
24:9,14 27:22 33:8 34:4 35:3 come8:20 26:14 49:5
29:24 30:1
31:15,17 48:14 35:13 36:2 37:8 38:23 connection
31:9 33:1,2
48:22 49:6 39:13 40:6 41:8 43:13,17 23:15 29:21
36:17,20 38:3
broadest12:18 41:24 50:8,12 44:2,5 Constitution
39:6,7,8 40:24
broadly3:20 52:1,12 COMMERCE 6:22
41:3,7 43:6,14
Burden32:24 choose5:25 8:24 1:8 construe48:25
45:1,7 47:1,9
Bureau12:7 circle20:21 committee 49:4,12
47:11,16,18
business5:2,17 circuit4:8 5:12 48:13 construing
51:7 52:13,14
10:22 12:23 18:24 24:25 commodity10:1 29:17,18 42:5
cases9:20 15:17
13:10,14 15:23 28:2,3,6,11,15 10:1,15 11:21 consumer10:2
17:5 26:13
16:3 18:21 29:5,17,25 52:6 consumers10:2
30:15 37:22
28:15 29:4,12 30:15 31:9 commonly30:7 consumption
49:19
29:21 30:7,10 34:18,21 37:20 communicating 8:22 27:19,20
categorically
30:20,22 31:1 39:5,8 47:25 26:22 35:15
30:11
31:12 46:16,21 50:13 51:8 competitor7:1 contemplated
categories4:7
50:25 51:3,7 circuit's3:11 competitors 48:2
7:19 12:12
businesses30:14 9:16 24:24 50:5 content48:5
20:15
46:23 28:24 39:4 compile11:4 context20:18
54
21:1 32:11 covered5:23,24 Deener32:24 differential electric25:6,7
36:13 7:19,21,22,24 defined13:13 10:24 electrical24:18
continent6:24 8:1 25:21 19:2 difficult11:7 24:19 25:14
contract50:1 covers5:9 defining8:1 12:18 40:6 electronic18:14
contractual29:1 create28:17 definition14:8 47:2 50:16 18:19 21:17
contrary3:19 29:14 46:9 definitions13:8 difficulties 22:5,9 27:2
18:16 51:1 created4:8 11:1 Department 40:14 eligibility28:17
contributions 49:8 1:23 directly39:25 31:2
30:13 creation38:7 dependent DIRECTOR eligible6:2 8:4
conventional 49:9,14 49:20 1:10 10:13 11:11
18:11 crunch35:20 depends45:6 discern20:25 12:14 27:9,13
corner48:2 culminate49:9 Deputy1:22 disclose14:12 29:16 30:6,8
Corning32:23 cure8:11 describe26:21 19:17 32:15 33:22
corporate5:25 curing18:12 50:24 disclosure8:23 36:11,19 37:10
corporation current14:2 described30:7 14:11 24:6,16 37:17 38:4
7:18 21:22 24:8,18 32:23 33:23 discovered 51:23
correct15:16 24:19 25:6,7 40:7 10:24 eliminate30:12
23:19 24:5 25:14,17,17 designed18:1 discovers44:21 emerging37:7
43:10 44:25 27:2,3 29:1 discussed27:12 emphasize
correctly46:4 destroy19:21 discussion26:13 44:10
D
Counsel50:8 29:10 dispute40:3 en39:6,9
D3:1
52:12 determination distance24:1 enable45:25
dah31:12,12,12
counterparties 40:9 27:3 enacted41:6
31:12,12
33:24 36:4 develop35:14 divide35:16 encompass
Dale26:21
counterparty devise29:1 doctor8:3,6,24 48:14,22 49:13
Dann15:21
34:13 devised26:22 dog49:23 encompasses
data12:11,13
counter-exam... 27:1 32:25 doing15:23 4:22
21:17,20 25:1
5:2 devising28:15 18:21 22:10 encouraging
25:24,25 26:1
countries12:23 41:19 drafters48:9 8:20 14:14
dating7:12
country38:25 diagnostic36:16 drafting17:10 endeavor49:13
DAVID1:7
50:2 47:12 draw35:10 enforcement
day11:14 28:11
couple27:25 diagnostics47:3 drawn4:1 16:19,25
deal4:20 12:1
37:5 Diamond15:4 DVD45:16 engaging34:12
27:9 46:19
course42:21 Diehr4:2 9:19 48:12 50:6
48:3
court1:1,17 15:2,4,4,5 dwell36:3 engineering
dealing4:14
3:10 15:20,24 17:23 18:10 D.C1:13,20,23 13:16,16
debate51:13
17:24 26:11 31:4,5 32:6,18 England10:23
E
decide5:4 15:24
28:22 30:14,25 difference19:4 entirely8:7 48:5
32:4 34:25 E2:1 3:1,1
32:17 36:15 34:7 45:20 entitled44:23
41:7 47:15 easier40:2
37:14,25 40:13 different10:9 enunciated9:19
decided15:22 economic50:2
40:18,20 44:3 18:7,20 21:25 equally4:6
28:22 39:8 economy14:2
47:8,13 49:16 22:8 32:8,19 era18:15
47:19 16:13
49:25 50:7 33:20 34:13 ESQ1:20,22 2:3
decision4:10 effect43:23
courts40:9 37:4,6 38:12 2:5,8
9:16 17:18 effectively26:23
Court's3:18 4:2 38:23 42:23,25 essence29:19
44:5 either3:14,16
4:2,10 40:23 43:20,24 45:4 essential33:5
decisions40:23 42:10 51:11
cover29:4 48:8 50:3 essentially33:24
55
38:1 explosion13:17 fixed10:2,3 52:6 future28:25 51:5
establish28:18 extent35:11 flagged31:21 32:3 great6:23 9:1
established3:19 extreme37:20 Flook37:14 grocer12:1 36:7
G
establishing extremely48:21 38:2 grocery36:7
G3:1
33:18 e.g31:6 32:7,7,9 flour33:1 ground27:18,24
general1:22
estate5:24 flow14:3,6,8 grounds15:22
F
6:16 12:19
Europe12:22 FM21:21 guess5:11 33:19
fabulous9:6 15:12 17:8,16
event37:15 focus22:21 34:15 36:14
face50:15 generality26:20
exactly19:8 focusing39:25 37:5 44:17
facts36:12,13 generally14:16
22:14 follow20:9 45:12 49:2
41:5 General's7:11
examination 48:11
H
fair22:22 generated25:4
51:23 followed9:8
fairly28:1 30:20 getting19:20 hand31:17
example7:18 following26:12
fall51:3 GINSBURG hangs4:12
8:2 46:11 31:6
falls8:17 5:22 12:21 happen48:3
48:12 follows41:4
far9:13 13:6 39:1,12 hard28:11
examples46:11 footnote33:10
farther50:22 39:17 47:18,24 34:20 35:9,14
exception38:7 35:4 36:3
Federal3:11 4:8 give8:2 11:8 47:10,16
38:10 force6:25
18:23 24:24,25 13:21 14:21 hardware45:25
exceptions4:1 foreclosed50:6
28:2,3,6,10,14 36:8 46:3
exchange14:16 forgetting41:5
28:24 29:5,17 given20:15 harm20:5,5
14:22 18:25 form51:10,10
29:25 30:15 35:23 hat4:12
21:16 51:12,14
31:9 34:18,20 give-and-take head52:8
exclude7:14,15 forming22:18
37:20 39:4,5,8 22:22 hear3:3
13:10,13 19:6 forth22:4
41:4,6 44:5 giving19:15 heard12:17
21:18 50:23 fortune6:14
47:24 50:13 go5:12 6:21 8:5 hearing39:6
exclusions3:22 forward39:2
51:8 9:18 12:7 17:6 heart34:2
exclusive14:21 forward-looki...
feel5:8 18:20 20:21 hedging8:21
37:3 18:16
feeling47:14 27:7 28:15 10:15 27:19
exclusively four4:7 12:12
fees14:6 33:4 34:25 33:21 38:10
36:24 19:13 20:15
fields13:15,17 37:20 45:7 48:6
exempt5:20 50:9
37:2 goes38:14,15 held29:15 30:6
exempted5:19 framers6:22
file6:17 going8:25 9:9 30:8,15,16
exist13:19,21 framing27:13
filed40:19 10:16 30:2 32:15 37:14,21
13:24 16:2,5 frankly47:17
financial13:16 36:6 46:19 38:3
49:7 free14:3,6,8
find3:16 20:6 good8:2 20:5 help8:13 19:9
existed16:4 friends4:17
33:25 34:10,13 27:21 37:19
43:2,21 26:19
finds4:3 Gottschalk helps6:15
expectancy function48:16
fine7:15 9:11 40:19 high10:7
10:25 11:1 functionality
firm6:8 government higher19:18
12:9 35:20,24
first7:13 9:19 4:11 25:22 historical35:15
expires14:18,19 functions42:23
27:25 28:17 39:2,10 40:17 history50:2
explain6:16 46:8
32:6 33:22 50:22 holding30:21
18:24 fundamental
37:6 40:3 government's 43:7
explained49:17 34:15
45:13,24 46:24 40:18 honest20:2
explanation fundamentally
49:3 Graham26:21 Honor7:5 10:17
11:4 50:3
fit42:2 granted6:17 13:2 14:10
explicitly37:22 further50:7
56
hook36:6 inappropriate inquiry39:25 irrelevant42:3 9:6,11,23
hope26:17 34:25 40:1 45:16 issue11:9 17:13 10:14,21 11:19
horse16:6 include13:11 insights16:7 20:12 27:22 11:24 12:6,21
horses16:5,8,15 included7:17 insignificant issued16:23 13:6,20,24
hub-and-spokes 12:11 15:14 35:5 issues14:20 14:5,17,24
41:22 16:23 insofar31:11 16:18 15:3,5,7,10,16
huge49:8 including4:2 32:2 items20:23 33:3 16:1,11,15
human7:18,20 30:12 instance36:15 37:21 17:4,8,12,23
7:22 8:7,11 incorrect29:14 instructions 18:4,18 19:8
J
49:13 50:24 increased13:25 46:13 20:11,17,20
J1:7,20 2:3,8
hypothesis independent insurance10:22 21:9,13,25
3:7 50:10
19:10 27:18 10:22 11:9,18 22:16 23:1,4,7
Jakes1:20 2:3,8
hypothetical indisputably 12:6 23:16,18,21
3:6,7,9 4:21
33:23 48:16 INTELLECT... 24:3,10,17,22
5:15 6:2,18 7:5
hypothetically individual32:25 1:9 25:5,9,11,15
7:13,22,25
9:12 industrial4:22 intended49:11 25:20 26:5,10
8:14,17 9:10
hypothetical's 4:25 13:16 intent8:16 26:17,18 27:16
9:18 10:11,17
9:15 16:14 18:11,15 20:25 29:3 30:1,22
11:10,23 12:3
27:11 interactive 31:3,8,25 33:8
I
12:10 13:2,12
industries29:10 33:23 34:8 34:4,17 35:3
idea9:25 17:24 13:23 14:1,10
industry10:22 interested34:12 35:13 36:2,23
27:19 29:7 14:19 15:2,4,6
11:2 Internet14:3 37:19 38:14
50:21 15:9,12,19
ineligible30:11 interpreted24:7 39:1,12,13,17
ideas3:24 9:20 16:10,13,18
inference32:9 introduced5:20 40:6,24 41:2
identified33:21 17:6,11,14
inflexible28:3 invent14:15 41:10,24 42:13
40:14 42:7 18:3,10 19:4
influence4:17 invented42:6,9 43:4,13 44:1,7
identify28:5 20:9,14,19
26:19 45:14 44:11,15,24
33:13 34:11,22 21:2,12,15
information invention18:10 45:9,19 46:2
36:4 22:11,19 23:3
14:3,6,9,15,22 30:6 32:12,12 46:10 47:4,18
identifying 23:6,14,17,20
18:13 19:1,25 43:7 47:24 50:8,12
36:18 23:23 24:6,12
20:2 21:16 inventions4:20 52:1,12
imagine37:2 24:21,23 25:7
24:1 4:25 7:9 14:12 Justices48:7
imagined48:9 25:10,12,19,23
infringement 21:19 37:10
K
implement5:5 26:6 50:9,10
8:6 inventors4:15
implemented 50:12 52:5 Kappos1:7 3:5
initially10:19 invents44:21
27:1 51:8 Johnston15:21 keep8:24 17:2
initiate9:25 investment
implements Joint9:24 keeping14:13
10:5,6 41:22,22
17:25 Jones4:16 KENNEDY
Initiating11:20 involve19:1
impose29:8 Judge17:9 10:21 12:6
innovation 29:12 32:20
improved45:25 39:18 17:23 18:4
29:15 34:2 33:12 37:11,11
improving14:8 jurisprudence 21:25 40:24
41:19 48:7 38:4 47:11
inadequate 15:1 41:2,10 43:4
innovations 51:19
24:15 jury5:25 43:13 44:15
27:5 36:16,18 involved32:17
inadvertent Justice1:23 3:3 47:4
43:23 47:3 40:1
19:11 3:9 4:11 5:6,22 kept9:3
50:4 involves8:11
inadvertently 6:5,20 7:7,20 key51:15,15
innovative27:8 35:4 52:2
19:9 7:23 8:9,15,25 kicks48:19
30:16 49:9 involving40:8
57
kind18:20 limits14:5 19:3 48:12,16,24 31:5 36:3 41:9 middle44:20
34:25 38:12,23 29:8 49:21 51:8,10 meaning7:8 mind32:23
48:8 line35:10 36:1 machines4:20 21:7 30:3 52:10
kinds22:20 link28:5,7,19 5:1 19:24 27:1 41:15 minus19:15
knew18:15 linked48:23,24 28:16 30:12,23 means4:14 minuses19:18
know4:15 5:13 49:18 31:12 46:23 12:19 19:3 minutes50:9
9:1 10:21,22 links28:16 49:18 41:16 46:8 modern16:3
16:1,7 18:5 literally48:22 machine-impl... meant4:13,19 Monday1:14
20:3,3 26:18 literature7:16 28:13 mechanisms money6:12
31:16 36:7,8 little9:15 22:24 machine-or-tr... 38:16 monopoly19:16
39:23,25 48:1 long8:7 9:22 3:12 32:10 medical5:18 Morse22:13,14
knowledge 12:14 35:2 36:25 36:16 47:3,12 24:13 26:13
12:19,20 21:7 look21:4,24 37:17 39:3,11 meet6:3 31:22 49:19
21:9,11,13 22:13 24:15 39:16 40:15,16 meets12:14 Morse's23:1,4
knows46:21 34:6 35:3,14 40:21,25 41:11 members47:14 23:23 32:11
44:18 42:3 47:22 mental52:8,9 move31:10,10
L
looked18:6 48:19 50:19 mention16:1
N
L1:3,22 2:5
looking7:14 making47:19 mentioned
26:8 N2:1,1 3:1
9:23 17:21 MALCOLM 26:19
language3:16 narrow3:11
19:5 20:15 1:22 2:5 26:8 mere18:25
3:23 4:3 15:10 5:12 31:15,17
30:2,3 34:5 man48:15 49:8 mess47:5,9
18:5 natural3:23
43:5 46:17 management met24:20
latest17:20 21:5
50:19,20 51:9 38:12,24 method7:12 8:3
Laughter9:5 naturally32:13
Lorenzo4:15 manipulation 8:10,21,21 9:2
20:13 47:7 nature3:23 4:6
lose28:23 18:19 10:12 11:10,17
law8:16 9:2 21:5 25:24
lot32:3 45:6 manufacture 11:18 12:23
12:22 18:17 49:7
lots19:6 44:22 48:13 15:23 18:12,20
19:13 20:22 near27:16,16
low10:7 manufacturing 18:21 26:24
29:4 37:1 necessarily
luck34:24 4:14,22 5:1 30:7,17 32:25
laws3:23 4:5 21:23 25:3
20:23 33:1,3 33:11 34:23
M
14:11 18:1 38:22
market11:21 38:10,19 41:16
21:5 machine3:15 necessary5:8
materials18:13 41:23 48:6
learned9:3 8:12 18:7 23:9 22:23 28:19
matter1:16 3:15 49:25 50:6,25
leave5:6 28:11 23:13 28:5,8,8 34:23
4:7 10:13 51:7,10,17,22
38:5 28:19 29:6,19 necessitate38:7
12:12 15:15,20 52:11
left31:14 48:18 29:22 30:8 need21:24
17:21 28:6 methods3:13,14
legal14:7 31:1,20 32:11 28:18 50:18
32:14,16,18 5:17,21,23
length27:12 32:17,21 33:6 negotiations
44:13,22 45:18 13:10,14 16:21
let's5:12 16:5 33:12 34:22 27:6
48:17 49:20 16:24 17:1
22:1 24:3 35:5,11 37:11 nervous9:15
50:15 51:9 26:22 29:2,12
level26:20 35:1 38:4 41:13 never4:23 5:9
52:15 30:10,20,23
licensing14:6 42:6,10,10,11 38:2 40:21
matters29:5 31:1,12 50:23
life10:25 12:8,9 42:14,15,22,24 49:25
maximizing 51:3
limit7:7,9 42:25 43:18,20 new4:4,8 6:9,10
10:8 MICHAEL1:20
limited4:23 44:14,22 45:2 6:13,24,24
Mayer's39:18 2:3,8 3:7 50:10
28:23 31:1 45:2,4,14,17 8:20 11:2 16:2
mean6:5 10:4 microprocessor
49:14 45:22 46:15,22 21:3,6 27:5,6
20:22 24:20 33:14
58
29:1,2 30:12 open28:25 17:13 18:22 42:17 43:7,12 phenomena
30:16 35:23 37:14,22 38:5 23:13 28:16 43:20 44:13 21:5
37:7 38:6 operated26:25 30:18 32:21 45:6 phenomenon
41:20 42:6,7 operation29:21 33:5 34:12,21 patented3:25 3:24
42:10,17,23,23 30:14 49:18 40:4 44:14 16:17,22 23:8 phone11:24,25
43:19 44:21 operations 49:20 27:15 31:18 52:3
45:14,21,21 13:15 parties33:13,24 45:17 46:12 phrase43:25
46:8 49:10,14 opinion15:11 39:10 50:5 phraseology
night49:24 28:24 39:18 party29:23 patenting4:5 7:11
nineteenth oppose46:25 pass21:23 6:2 8:10 physical11:17
19:23 opposed8:12 passed5:21 patents12:23 11:20 25:2,6,6
nonobvious 12:19 22:24 20:22 13:21 16:23 25:8 26:25
38:19 52:7 patent1:10 3:17 46:16 27:10 49:7,10
non-technolog... opposing29:23 5:5 7:3,12 8:4 patent-eligible 49:15 51:19
13:18 oral1:16 2:2 3:7 8:16,19 10:4,7 3:12 17:21 52:1
noscitur49:4 26:8 10:19 11:11,16 28:4 50:1 picking52:2,2
note32:1 37:13 order28:14 32:6 12:10,22 14:5 52:11 place22:25
notion13:1 28:1 35:24 45:25 14:11,14,18,19 people4:17 8:20 37:15 38:24
novel10:11 ordinary48:21 14:20 15:8 11:15 14:12,14 51:12 52:7
38:19 42:15 organize6:10 16:12 17:2 16:6,25 17:2 places33:20
46:9 organizing 18:1,17 19:13 19:15,19 26:19 39:22
November1:14 50:23 20:4,22 22:2 26:22 28:25 plan5:24
number6:16 original6:21 9:2 22:17,21 23:10 33:24 34:10 plausible7:3
10:10 16:22 originally4:13 23:22 27:8,13 38:22 40:3 play35:2
17:14 39:9 outer19:2 27:17 28:17 44:25 52:3 player45:17
numbers35:21 outlines15:12 29:4,16 30:6,8 people's31:16 please3:10
outset50:4 30:11 31:2,19 percent9:3 26:11
O
overpatenting 32:15 33:22 perform29:20 plus19:14,15
O2:1 3:1
22:23 34:21 36:11,19 35:25 41:21 poems7:16
object25:3
37:1,9,10,16 42:23 46:1,8 point34:15
P
objection29:24
38:4,11,17 performed8:3 36:14 38:3,8
objects49:7 P3:1
39:20 42:14,20 period35:16 44:9 45:13
obvious23:2,5 packet25:25
45:1 46:2,12 permission7:2 48:10
32:9 38:20 page2:2 9:24
46:21 48:9 19:20 points31:24
obviousness 44:19,20
49:1 50:20 permissions 32:5
10:18 15:24 pages33:18 34:5
51:3,18,20,24 19:20 posed39:9
22:24 38:16 34:14
patentability permit12:23 position9:21
office1:11 10:19 panel39:7
32:20 35:6 person11:9 12:4 15:1 40:17
11:16 23:10 paradigmatic
47:2 12:7 20:1 33:3 47:14
51:18,20,24 27:13
patentable6:1 34:24 42:6,9 possibility37:14
oh17:25 41:8 part21:6 28:8
6:15,18 8:4,8 42:19,21 38:5
oil35:15 28:12,13 34:17
9:9,21 10:12 Pete's16:16 possible6:25
okay6:20 9:11 42:2
11:4,6 12:13 Petitioner27:22 32:2
31:13 32:4 participants
16:9 26:24 50:11 potential34:13
45:9 11:22
30:17,23 31:23 Petitioners1:5 50:5
old17:4,4 45:20 particular3:14
33:11,17 35:7 1:21 2:4,9 3:8 potentially6:18
Once37:2 13:17 15:19
35:17 36:9 38:10 9:10 41:17
59
44:23 22:18 27:1 28:24 range17:6 rejection50:25
practical21:8 28:4,9,9,12 provider11:21 49:13 related14:1
51:15,17 29:16,18 30:3 providers10:1 rapidly37:7 23:12 24:4
Practically 30:3,9,17 provides7:25 raw18:12 relationship
21:15 32:20,22,23,24 provision10:18 read3:20 39:18 21:14
practice26:16 33:16 35:14,16 PTO28:14 48:22 relied51:20
29:11 38:3 40:7,10 36:12 46:6 reading23:10 rely36:24
precedence3:19 41:14,17 42:5 public14:16,17 real21:16 25:3 relying5:11
precedent4:2 42:7,15,17 14:23 27:5 51:22 52:7 remain47:16
precise28:16 44:12,14,21 puddle33:2 really8:19 9:2 remaining50:9
35:1 45:4,5 48:18 pull32:4 10:23 11:1 remedies5:19
preclude37:21 48:21 49:5,10 pulled31:10,11 15:25 16:16,19 remember46:3
precluding37:1 49:12,17 50:2 pulling31:11 19:21 21:6 reply40:19
preempt27:19 50:15 52:2,8 punched36:8 22:21 24:14 reports48:13
preexisting processes4:9,22 purely12:5 52:8 28:4 32:3 represent25:2
35:20 4:23,24 5:1 6:3 purpose6:21 34:16 36:20 38:21
prefer27:24 27:11,14,14 9:14 43:24 42:11,16 45:15 reproduced
present36:20 28:7 50:14 purposes37:9 48:20 50:2,23 44:19
presented43:10 52:9 38:20 50:25 require6:23
previously produce19:16 put5:7 39:2 realm26:25 11:14 46:3
43:21 46:8 43:8 27:9 39:19 required3:18
price10:2,3 product19:19 p.m1:18 3:2 reargument 4:9 19:7
19:19 33:14,15 productive49:8 52:14 39:9 requirement
52:6 program45:3 reason26:24 3:13 13:3
Q
primary27:24 45:21 reasonable7:8 14:11
qualify25:1
principle3:20 programmed reasoning51:10 requirements
quality49:24
28:18 40:22 29:20 30:12 reasons40:2 6:4 12:15
question9:1
principles4:6 35:23 41:18 43:5 49:2 requires14:6,12
13:9 14:24
9:19 15:13 42:22 43:11 REBUTTAL 52:5
17:9 20:16,21
prior5:17 10:20 48:11 2:7 50:10 research13:15
22:12 34:17
11:14 38:21 programming recognize47:1 reserve26:3
35:14 36:21
51:4 43:19 46:7 recognized3:22 resist5:25 28:1
42:16,16 43:9
probably9:7 programs41:20 51:2 resolving47:10
43:18 50:17,19
24:15 progress7:2 reduce6:16 respect19:24,25
questions26:3
problem16:25 prohibition4:5 31:19 20:1,7,7 23:9
28:12 34:20
18:22 31:13,21 prong32:10 reduced9:7 28:7
35:9 39:9
44:15 properly40:4 11:12 Respondent
47:11,16 50:16
problems21:17 PROPERTY refer49:6 1:24 2:6 26:9
quite17:7 49:12
22:20 29:14 1:9 referred5:13 responsive
quotes17:16
31:16 40:6 proposal17:25 40:7 34:16
47:2 proposed23:9 regarded40:4 rest23:24 24:4
R
process4:4 5:23 protect18:1 regarding36:21 26:4
R3:1
8:1,13 10:4 protection5:8 reject9:12 rests12:22
radio21:21
12:15 16:14 20:4 30:11 22:16,17 result51:4,16
raised27:22
17:25 18:8,8 provide5:17 rejected23:10 retest47:25
29:24 32:2
18:11 20:22 47:10 23:11,24 24:11 reversed3:13
RAND1:3
21:1,2,3 22:8 provided14:22 24:13 review36:12,12
60
Revolution4:25 saw45:12 series9:25 10:5 sole50:14 speed7:12
Rich17:9 saying7:23 10:6 11:20 solely52:9 spent33:18
right13:12 33:15 34:5 12:13 33:4 Solicitor1:22 spoken20:14
14:18 20:8 36:11,24 44:25 35:25 48:22 7:10 17:16 sponte39:6
23:20 27:20 45:12,12 46:14 serious16:25 solve34:20 stand17:20
44:20 45:7,10 51:20 set9:7 10:2,3 solved31:16 standard38:16
46:16 says4:4,12 21:3 11:12 12:1 somebody4:16 start26:12 31:4
rights5:17 31:6 35:14 20:23 39:6,8 16:17,19 34:11 state14:2 17:19
14:22 51:4 36:3 39:19 46:13,14 37:8 45:13 17:21 29:16
rigid3:11 28:2 42:7 44:20 setting33:14 46:20 30:2,6 32:8,8
50:18 Scalia4:11 46:22 somebody's 32:19 40:24
rigidly19:5 14:17 16:1,11 shipping11:1 52:8 41:2,5,9,14,19
risk8:22 11:5 16:15 17:4 shoe-horning someone's52:9 42:20 43:6,7,9
27:20 38:12,24 24:17,22 25:5 37:3 sorry11:19 43:14 44:5
50:1 25:9,11,15,20 shorthand39:24 39:13 44:1 51:6
risks29:2 26:17,18 30:22 show5:2 sort22:9 31:4 States1:1,17
road35:10 scheme33:21 side42:19 48:20 31:19 32:13 station36:8
46:19 science12:24 48:25 33:21 36:19 statistics12:8,8
ROBERTS3:3 39:21 sides52:3 48:6 statute3:17 4:9
9:23 10:14 sciences7:11 sign34:9 SOTOMAYOR 5:19 7:25 9:14
11:19,24 22:16 scientific22:7 signal22:10 7:7,20,23 8:9 20:10 22:21
26:5 33:8 34:4 se9:20 signals18:14,19 8:15 13:20,24 31:19 41:4,6
35:3,13 36:2 search7:1 36:8 22:5,9,11 14:5 18:18 44:18 48:9
39:13 41:24 second14:13 similar31:5 20:17,20 21:9 49:1 51:2,4
50:8 52:1,12 34:16 40:5 similarly30:14 21:13 23:1,4,7 statutory4:3 5:5
rolling33:2 49:16 simple29:4 23:16,18,21 6:3 7:19 12:15
root18:14 secret8:24 simplicity39:18 24:3,10 29:3 29:17,18 42:5
rooted51:22 14:13 simply13:8 30:1 36:23 step40:8,10
rubber18:12 SECRETARY 18:14 29:11 37:19 38:14 47:21 52:2
rubric42:4 1:8 33:11 34:11 sought17:2 steps6:16 9:7
rule15:18 28:1 secrets17:3 35:19 36:15 38:11 11:12,17,20
ruled15:20 section3:16,20 46:12 sound21:22 12:14 14:7,7
30:20 3:22 5:16 8:4 sir47:1 24:8,18,19 33:4,6 47:19
rules28:16 10:19 29:24 situation20:6 25:3,4,5,5,11 48:23 51:19
ruling29:8 30:1 38:20 41:15 31:22 34:1 25:15,16,18 STEVENS
37:23 46:25 43:2,3,3 51:1 46:20 27:2,4 14:24 15:3,5,7
48:5 see5:14 10:9 situations32:24 Space48:7 15:10,16 17:8
run6:25 10:18 18:6 31:13,25 skilled38:22 speak51:6 17:12 42:13
11:14 22:20 35:22 skip24:3 speaking7:15 44:1,7,11
runs51:1 seen5:9 slow19:21 27:6 45:19 46:2
segment28:9 small28:9 speaks13:4 Stewart1:22 2:5
S
sell10:7 society8:10 special43:24 26:7,8,10,18
S2:1 3:1
sellers10:6 sociis49:4 specific3:15 27:23 29:13
safer29:11
sells36:5,7 software30:16 15:14 30:5,25 31:7
sake9:15 16:16
sense12:18 33:1 35:23 36:16 specifically 31:24 32:5
sale52:6
38:12 39:24 42:23 43:19,22 34:10 33:8,19 34:8
satisfy43:2
49:23 51:12 46:8 47:3,12 speech48:21 35:8,19 36:10
61
37:5,25 38:18 sufficiently 27:6,6 36:17 47:22 48:19 50:17,24 51:1
39:1,5,15,23 40:10 38:12,24 47:12 50:13,14,18 51:19,23 52:10
41:1,8,13 42:1 suggesting technological 51:25 thinks6:9,10,11
42:18 43:8,16 13:20 21:20 40:5,11 testing31:4 6:24
44:4,9,17 45:8 suggestion9:17 40:13 tests39:23 third49:22
45:11,23 46:5 sun5:9 48:15 technologically tether7:10 thought4:20
46:24 47:6,8 support4:3 15:1 20:24 text44:18 5:14 16:16
47:20 48:4 suppose9:11,12 technologies thank20:11 20:11 33:9
stop7:1 9:14 31:3 43:5 36:21 37:3,8 26:4,5 50:8,12 41:10 44:24
store36:7 Supreme1:1,17 technology7:9 52:12 46:11 47:4,5,9
storehouse21:6 sure31:23 12:17,18,24,25 theory16:9 47:13
strange49:12 surely49:11 13:13 14:2 thing6:10 10:5 three49:2
Street17:19,22 surgical8:3,21 29:6 38:6 23:8,21 32:6,8 threshold22:25
29:16 30:2,7 sweeping30:21 39:19,20,21 32:19 40:15 thrown51:24
40:24 41:3,5,9 switches45:3 40:1,8 48:23 42:14 49:16,22 tie7:10
41:14,19 42:20 46:22 technology-ba... things7:15,17 tied3:14 12:24
43:6,7,9,14 system5:5 8:20 13:1,7,11 7:18 8:21 9:4 20:24 29:6
44:5 51:6 14:14,21 37:8 telegraph23:9 11:15 15:14 time26:4 27:12
strong49:23 systems12:25 telegraphy 16:12 17:15,15 today16:5 18:12
strongest14:25 13:3,10 23:15 19:6,12,13,21 19:25 24:15
students9:3 telephone6:11 27:25 31:4 43:14
T
stupid44:2 26:13 49:19 32:1,15 37:2,6 tool33:5
T2:1,1
sua39:5 television45:16 41:16 42:8 totality40:23
table11:5
subject3:15 4:7 48:11,15 45:6 48:1 touch18:6
tables10:25
10:13 12:12 tell20:2 39:12 49:14 tracking34:10
tailoring5:7
15:14,20 17:21 telling19:24 think5:14 6:22 TRADEMARK
take5:10 9:13
44:13 tells15:13 7:13,16 8:9 1:11
12:4 16:5 22:3
submitted52:13 term4:12,13 9:18 11:3,7,10 train16:8
31:24 35:6
52:15 12:18 29:18,18 11:16 13:14 training16:5
37:15
substance8:12 42:5 48:18,21 14:25 15:9,19 transaction
taken38:24
18:7,19 27:7 49:5,17 16:6,13,24 34:12 52:4
takeover5:25
29:7 49:10 terms6:17 17:15,19 18:15 transactions
takes12:7 22:25
51:12,14 11:13 13:5 19:4 20:9,16 10:1,5,6 11:21
33:17 52:7
substantial 20:15 33:25 21:2,19,24 36:4
talk41:2
40:10 47:2 49:5,6 22:17,19 25:7 transform3:15
talking13:6
substantiality test3:12 4:8 25:9,20,23 41:25 42:1
29:10
35:1 19:5 21:18,20 26:20 27:23 48:17
tangential35:4
substantive 21:23 22:24 28:20,21 29:13 transformation
tasks30:18,19
18:25 24:20,24 25:21 30:5 32:8 34:8 19:2,5,7 21:17
41:21
substitute22:17 26:15 31:23 34:17 35:13,19 21:18,23 24:20
tax5:21,23,24
succeed6:15 32:10 34:18 37:25 39:24 24:24 25:1
teachers9:8
success46:6 36:25 37:3,18 40:12 42:12,18 28:6,19 29:7
teaching9:2
successful6:7,8 37:19 39:3,3 43:6,22 44:4,7 31:2,15 32:13
16:21,24 17:1
6:23 39:11,24 40:13 44:8 45:11,23 32:14,18 34:22
29:2
sued16:25 40:15,16,22,25 45:24,24 46:5 35:11 37:12
technique34:9
sufficient28:17 42:3 43:15,16 46:17 47:6,8 38:5 42:2
techniques27:5
38:21 44:6 45:15 47:14,17,21 45:15,18 48:24
62
49:19 51:13,14 United1:1,17 vintage40:17 words21:4 22:3 199:24
transformed unobvious10:12 virtue34:18 22:18 31:5,5 195220:22
25:16,18 27:2 unpatentable 48:14 49:14,25 48:13
W
27:4 32:16 27:18 51:1 197140:20
want11:8 22:4
transforming unresolved work12:25 13:7
2
36:15
24:18 32:7 31:14 47:16 13:9 20:18,18
wanted6:23 235:16 44:19
transmission unsuitable workmen4:15
11:8 209:24
25:24,24 47:10 world21:16
wants50:23 20038:25
transmit24:5,8 unsure29:11 29:9,9 51:22
WARSAW1:4 20091:14
25:25 use14:18 17:3 52:7
Washington 262:6
transmitted 19:19 20:25 wouldn't5:13
1:13,20,23 2735:16 51:2
22:12 25:13,15 23:8,12 30:18 6:8 7:5 13:7,19
6:25 36:9 287(c)5:18 8:5
25:17 27:3 32:10,17 33:5 16:20 21:23
wasn't23:6 30:2
transmitting 33:13,15 35:5 28:10 29:11
3
way6:10 7:6
21:22 24:1 35:17 36:17 32:13
32:4
9:13 12:4
true10:17 20:6 44:14 45:4 writes4:16
13:13 16:8
22:2 47:17 46:23 written11:13
5
19:24 22:5
trying18:24 useful3:21 4:4 17:12,14
522:13
26:15 36:24
31:25 32:1 4:13,19,21 5:3 wrong4:18
502:9
40:8 41:9 43:8
36:5,14,17 6:14 7:11,14 18:16 23:11
5217:10
43:17 44:2,3,3
50:20 7:21 8:18 37:23
5333:18
44:6 48:25
turn46:21 12:16 21:3,7 wrote17:17,18
50:24 51:11
turning22:9 21:10,13 30:13
7
X
ways17:7 33:21
two8:19 19:12 44:21 51:16
70s15:21
49:20 x1:2,12
19:14,14,15,18 user5:17 51:4
wealth10:8
31:18 33:20 8
Y
V
website33:23
37:22 40:2
823:24,25 24:14
years13:19,22
v1:6 3:5 15:4,21 34:11
type18:11 32:22
809:3 32:2
38:25
32:23,24 40:19 weeding38:16
33:16 50:18
Yellow34:5,14
vacuum20:18 went29:23 9
51:7
valid14:20 weren't51:9
types4:24 91:14
0
valuable21:19 we're36:25
typewriter
08-9641:6 3:4
27:8 46:25
33:16
various29:20 we've16:22,24
typically6:7
1
41:21 35:8
19:24 10:10,15
U
vast6:23 what-not16:3
11:12,13 43:2
underlying26:1 veers36:23 wheels7:1
1:001:18 3:2
understand21:4 vehicle36:17 whisperers16:6
1:5552:14
23:7 42:13 47:10 win4:17 26:19
10013:19,22
44:11 version39:24 27:24
1013:16,20,22
understood33:9 vice34:18 wire24:5 25:13
4:7 38:15
undertaken view6:13 7:3 25:17
41:15
38:13 9:12,13 11:3,6 wires25:16
10229:24 38:15
undulating 26:14 41:12 wonderful9:1
43:3
21:22 24:7 42:4 word12:17 19:2
10310:19 29:25
unforeseen3:21 views17:20,20 21:1,9 33:7
38:15,20 43:3
37:15 38:6 vigorously28:1 49:10,12
168010:23
63

08 964 Bilski Oral Arg

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

08 964 Bilski Oral Arg

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

1

You might also like