English  |  正體中文  |  简体中文  |  Post-Print筆數 : 27 |  Items with full text/Total items : 113303/144284 (79%)
Visitors : 50835664      Online Users : 647
RC Version 6.0 © Powered By DSPACE, MIT. Enhanced by NTU Library IR team.
Scope Tips:
  • please add "double quotation mark" for query phrases to get precise results
  • please goto advance search for comprehansive author search
    •  Adv. Search
    Home ‧ Login ‧ Upload ‧ Help ‧ About ‧ Administer Goto mobile version


    Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/139804


    Title: Federal Circuit’s Unconventionality Approach to Patent-Ineligibility Challenges in a Motion to Dismiss
    Authors: 陳秉訓
    Chen, Ping-Hsun
    Contributors: 科管智財所
    Keywords: Patent-eligibility;35 U.S.C. § 101;inventive concept;unconventional;non conventional
    Date: 2021-07
    Issue Date: 2022-04-11 14:32:17 (UTC+8)
    Abstract: Under Alice Corp. Pty. v. CLS Bank International, when a claim is found directed to a patent-ineligible subject matter, the claim is still patent-eligible if it includes an inventive concept. The Federal Circuit’s case law has indicated that an alleged inventive concept with unconventionality may satisfy step two of the Alice standard. Specifically, this paper demonstrates that the case law suggests a way to prove such unconventionality. That is, a patent specification or a patentee’s complaint must include four topics: (1) prior art technology; (2) how a system executing the claimed invention performs differently from the prior art technology; (3) the benefits derived from the claimed unconventional system; and (4) a specific feature operating differently from the prior art technology. With these factual statements, a patent may survive a patent-ineligibility challenge in a motion to dismiss.
    patent-ineligible subject matter, the claim is still patent-eligible if it includes an
    inventive concept. The Federal Circuit’s case law has indicated that an alleged
    inventive concept with unconventionality may satisfy step two of the Alice standard.
    Specifically, this paper demonstrates that the case law suggests a way to prove such
    unconventionality. That is, a patent specification or a patentee’s complaint must
    include four topics: (1) prior art technology; (2) how a system executing the claimed
    invention performs differently from the prior art technology; (3) the benefits derived
    from the claimed unconventional system; and (4) a specific feature operating
    differently from the prior art technology. With these factual statements, a patent
    may survive a patent-ineligibility challenge in a motion to dismiss.
    Relation: UIC Review of Intellectual Property Law, Vol.20, No.4, pp.331-357
    Data Type: article
    Appears in Collections:[智慧財產研究所] 期刊論文

    Files in This Item:

    File Description SizeFormat
    9.pdf496KbAdobe PDF2336View/Open


    All items in 政大典藏 are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved.


    社群 sharing

    著作權政策宣告 Copyright Announcement
    1.本網站之數位內容為國立政治大學所收錄之機構典藏，無償提供學術研究與公眾教育等公益性使用，惟仍請適度，合理使用本網站之內容，以尊重著作權人之權益。商業上之利用，則請先取得著作權人之授權。
    The digital content of this website is part of National Chengchi University Institutional Repository. It provides free access to academic research and public education for non-commercial use. Please utilize it in a proper and reasonable manner and respect the rights of copyright owners. For commercial use, please obtain authorization from the copyright owner in advance.

    2.本網站之製作，已盡力防止侵害著作權人之權益，如仍發現本網站之數位內容有侵害著作權人權益情事者，請權利人通知本網站維護人員(nccur@nccu.edu.tw)，維護人員將立即採取移除該數位著作等補救措施。
    NCCU Institutional Repository is made to protect the interests of copyright owners. If you believe that any material on the website infringes copyright, please contact our staff(nccur@nccu.edu.tw). We will remove the work from the repository and investigate your claim.
    DSpace Software Copyright © 2002-2004  MIT &  Hewlett-Packard  /   Enhanced by   NTU Library IR team Copyright ©   - Feedback