We Need High Court Guidance On 'Abstract Idea'

By Charles Macedo and Sandra Hudak, Amster Rothstein & Ebenstein LLP (May 4, 2017, 11:11 AM EDT) -- In Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593 (2010), the U.S. Supreme Court was faced with the challenge of defining the law of patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for the first time since the early 1980s. The Supreme Court held that the "machine-or-transformation test," while "an important and useful clue" of patent-eligibility, was not the sole test for determining whether an invention is a patent-eligible process. Bilski v. Kappos, 561 U.S. 593, 604 (2010). It did not establish an alternative test, but instead reviewed its previous precedent to find that the patent-at-issue was indeed invalid as directed to the abstract idea of "hedging risk."...

Law360 is on it, so you are, too.

A Law360 subscription puts you at the center of fast-moving legal issues, trends and developments so you can act with speed and confidence. Over 200 articles are published daily across more than 60 topics, industries, practice areas and jurisdictions.


A Law360 subscription includes features such as

  • Daily newsletters
  • Expert analysis
  • Mobile app
  • Advanced search
  • Judge information
  • Real-time alerts
  • 450K+ searchable archived articles

And more!

Experience Law360 today with a free 7-day trial.

Start Free Trial

Already a subscriber? Click here to login

Hello! I'm Law360's automated support bot.

How can I help you today?

For example, you can type:
  • I forgot my password
  • I took a free trial but didn't get a verification email
  • How do I sign up for a newsletter?
Ask a question!