LawFont.com

A little while ago I blogged about Ex parte Carl A. Lundgren, a decision of the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences of the US Patent and Trade Mark Office (USPTO). In that decision, the Board overturned the Examiner’s objection to the patent, holding there is no separate “technological arts” test in determining whether a process is statutory subject matter. The decision potentially broadened the patentability of what you might call ‘pure business methods’ – those not instantiated in ‘technology’ (like software or hardware).

This development in the US is relevant to a current debate in Australia, about the ‘technological arts’ type requirement in Australian law. That requirement has been used to reject ‘pure’ business method patents in Australia. The issue was discussed in the Federal Court decision in Grant, currently on appeal to the Full Federal Court. See my old post for more discussion.

Well, now, the USPTO has issued amended examination guidelines, in response to the Board decision. Patently-O has the discussion.