The present U.S. eligibility jurisprudence, and especially that of the Federal Circuit, not only creates serious issues of U.S. domestic law but also arguably places the U.S. in violation of its obligations under the TRIPS treaty with respect to inventions at both ends of the subject-matter spectrum. Acts of Congress, including Section 101, where fairly possible, ought to be construed so as not to conflict with international law or with an international agreement with the United States, particularly where, as with TRIPS, the United States was the moving spirit behind the treaty. See Murray v. The Schooner Charming Betsy, 6 U.S. (2 Cranch) 64, 118 (1804). Although there may have been room for doubt prior to the en banc refusal in Athena and the Australian decision in Ariosa, it is submitted following Judge Moore’s dissent that the situation has become a virtual certainty.
Recent Posts
- USPTO Director Kathi Vidal Announces She Will Resign in Early December
- Only Congressional Patent Reform Can Restore Constitutional Rights
- ParkerVision is Latest to Petition SCOTUS for Review of CAFC’s ‘Heavy Reliance’ on Rule 36
- Other Barks & Bites for Friday, November 8: Judge Dismisses Copyright Lawsuit Against OpenAI Filed by News Outlets; Reports Finds Record Number of Global Patent Filings; ITC Finds Semiconductor Company Infringed on Competitor’s Patent
- How Bayh-Dole Supporters Made a Successful Goal Line Stand