| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
"[A] series of steps is a “process” within the meaning of § 101 unless it falls within a judicially determined category of nonstatutory subject matter exceptions."<ref>Ex Parte Murray, 9 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1819, 1988 WL 252338, at *2 (Bd. Pat. App. & Interf. 1988).</ref> |
"[A] series of steps is a “process” within the meaning of § 101 unless it falls within a judicially determined category of nonstatutory subject matter exceptions."<ref>Ex Parte Murray, 9 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1819, 1988 WL 252338, at *2 (Bd. Pat. App. & Interf. 1988).</ref> |
||
| + | |||
| + | The [[U.S. Supreme Court]] has stated that "[a] process is a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or a series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced to a different state or thing."<ref>[[Cochrane v. Deener]], 94 U.S. 780-787-88 (1877).</ref> "Transformation and reduction of an article 'to a different state or thing' is the clue to the patentability of a process claim that does not include particular machines."<ref>[[Gottschalk v. Benson]], 409 U.S. 63, 70 (1972).</ref> |
||
== References == |
== References == |
||
Revision as of 20:53, 8 September 2008
Biometrics
The distinguishing characteristics are extracted from the raw biometric sample and processed into a biometric identifier record (sometimes called biometric sample or biometric template).
U.S. Patent Law
Under 35 U.S.C. §100(b), a process is defined as a:
- "process, art or method, and includes a 'new use of a known process, machine, manufacture, composition of matter, or material."
"[A] series of steps is a “process” within the meaning of § 101 unless it falls within a judicially determined category of nonstatutory subject matter exceptions."[1]
The U.S. Supreme Court has stated that "[a] process is a mode of treatment of certain materials to produce a given result. It is an act, or a series of acts, performed upon the subject-matter to be transformed and reduced to a different state or thing."[2] "Transformation and reduction of an article 'to a different state or thing' is the clue to the patentability of a process claim that does not include particular machines."[3]
References
- ↑ Ex Parte Murray, 9 U.S.P.Q.2d (BNA) 1819, 1988 WL 252338, at *2 (Bd. Pat. App. & Interf. 1988).
- ↑ Cochrane v. Deener, 94 U.S. 780-787-88 (1877).
- ↑ Gottschalk v. Benson, 409 U.S. 63, 70 (1972).