The USPTO's 2024 AI subject matter eligibility guidance emphasizes that avoiding judicial exceptions is crucial for overcoming Section 101 rejections. Key points include the importance of not only what is claimed but also what is omitted in claims. Breadth plays a critical role in determining if a claim constitutes an abstract idea. Importantly, the examples provided are hypothetical, underscoring the need for practitioners to interpret guidance carefully, as it demonstrates the subtle complexities involved in successfully navigating the claims process.
It's not about what you claim, it's actually about what you don't claim. To avoid a Section 101 rejection, avoid reciting judicial exceptions.
It's about breadth; whether a limitation is an abstract idea often comes down to its breadth in achieving a particular solution.
Remember, all of the sample claims and their corresponding backgrounds are hypothetical, indicating the need for careful interpretation in applying the guidance.
The guidance emphasizes that reciting both statutory and non-statutory matter in a claim directs the claim to non-statutory matter under broadest reasonable interpretation.
Collection
[
|
...
]