USPTO資料：
- 美國專利局於10月（October 17, 2019）更新專利適格性審查方針
https://www.uspto.gov/about-us/news-updates/update-patent-subject-matter-eligibility
- October 2019 Update: Subject Matter Eligibility（https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/peg_oct_2019_update.pdf）
II. The Groupings Of Abstract Ideas Enumerated In The 2019 PEG
為了要輔助審查委員判斷何謂「抽象概念」的特徵，指導分針根據法院意見列舉出「被法院認證」的抽象概念，提供審查參考。
一般來說，會被認定是抽象概念的發明有三類：(1)數學方法、(2)組織人類活動、(3)人類心智活動。這幾類還可能同時存在同一發明中。
A. Mathematical Concepts，「數學概念」包括幾種態樣： “數學關係式”、“數學公式或方程式”以及“數學計算”。
申請專利範圍中引述數學方法的案例可參考美國最高法院判例 - PARKER v. FLOOK (1978)（https://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-supreme-court/437/584.html），其中法院意見是，不會因為申請專利範圍引述了數學方法而單純地斷定發明不具可專利性，而會查驗整體是否僅採用了習知方案。
另一方面是，或者專利範圍並未直接描述數學方法，而僅是包括了「數學概念（mathematical concept）」，不見得能判斷落入了抽象概念的範疇。
本部落格相關報導：
- 軟體專利（CAFC判決：CLS Bank v. Alice Corp.）（https://enpan.blogspot.com/2013/05/cafccls-bank-v-alice-corp.html）
- History of Software Patents I（https://enpan.blogspot.com/2009/01/history-of-software-patents-i.html）
i. “Mathematical Relationships”
「數學關係式」指的是一些變數與數字的關係，不一定直接以數學符號表示。
舉例來說，專利範圍引用數學關係式的例子：
- a relationship between reaction rate and temperature, which relationship can be expressed in the form of a formula called the Arrhenius equation, Diamond v. Diehr;
- a conversion between binary-coded decimal and pure binary numerals, Gottschalk v. Benson; and
- a mathematical relationship between enhanced directional radio activity and antenna conductor arrangement (i.e., the length of the conductors with respect to the operating wave length and the angle between the conductors), Mackay Radio & Tel. Co. v. Radio Corp. of Am.
ii. “Mathematical Formulas or Equations”
「數學公式或方程式」，為引述了數學公式或方程式的專利範圍為落入數學概念的範疇，包括用文字描述方程式本身的方式。
數學公式或方程式案例：
- a Arrhenius equation, Diamond v. Diehr;
- a formula for computing an alarm limit, Parker v. Flook; and
- a mathematical formula for hedging (claim 4), Bilski v. Kappos.
iii. “Mathematical Calculations”
「數學計算」，為引述數學計算的專利範圍為落入數學概念的範疇，這類範圍為使用數學方法執行計算以判斷變數或數值的方法，舉凡執行了數學運算的步驟都是一種數學計算。
舉例：
- performing a resampled statistical analysis to generate a resampled distribution, SAP Am., Inc. v. InvestPic, LLC;
- calculating a number representing an alarm limit value using the mathematical formula ‘‘B1=B0 (1.0–F) + PVL(F),’’ Parker v. Flook; and
- using a formula to convert geospatial coordinates into natural numbers, Burnett v. Panasonic Corp.
B. Certain Methods of Organizing Human Activity
「組織人類活動的方法」，如基本經濟原則、實踐、商業或法律互動、管理個人行為、關係或互動等。
其實不是所有管理人類活動的方法都屬於抽象的，如組合一些藥品成份產生的藥物配方。這個組織人類活動的範疇如：基本經濟原則、實踐、商業或法律互動、管理個人行為、人與人之間的關係或互動（fundamental economic principles or practices, commercial or legal interactions, managing personal behavior, and relationships or interactions between people），即便是一個人、多個人與電腦的活動，都算落入"certain methods of organizing human activity"的範疇中。
i. “Fundamental Economic Practices or Principles”
「基本經濟實踐或原則」，描述有關經濟與商業等被認為是組織人類活動的專利標的，例如套利交易，保險和避險等，這裡很重要地提醒，寫成"fundamental（基本）"並非指的是過去已知的活動。
這類基本經濟實踐或原則除了MPEP2106.04(a)(2)(I)所列舉範例之外，其他範例顯示在以下幾個案例中：
- local processing of payments for remotely purchased goods, Inventor Holdings, LLC v. Bed Bath & Beyond, Inc.;
- using a marking affixed to the outside of a mail object to communicate information about the mail object, i.e., the sender, recipient, and contents of the mail object, Secured Mail Solutions LLC v. Universal Wilde, Inc.; and
- placing an order based on displayed market information, Trading Technologies Int’l, Inc. v. IBG LLC .
MPEP2106.04(a)(2)(I)可參考：法院定義的「抽象概念」 - MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)（https://enpan.blogspot.com/2018/07/mpep-210604a2.html）
ii. “Commercial or Legal Interactions”
「商業或法律互動」，這是有關合同、法律義務，廣告，行銷或販售活動或行為，以及業務關係等的專利標的。
合約中商業或法律互動案例：
- a transaction performance guaranty, which is a contractual relationship, buySAFE, Inc. v. Google, Inc.; and
- processing insurance claims for a covered loss or policy event under an insurance policy (i.e., an agreement in the form of a contract), Accenture Global Services GmbH v. Guidewire Software, Inc.
- tax-free exchanges of real estate, where the exchange is a legal obligation, Fort Properties, Inc. v. American Master Lease LLC; and
- arbitration (i.e., resolving a legal dispute between two parties using an arbitrator), In re Comiskey.
- using advertising as an exchange or currency, Ultramercial, Inc. v. Hulu, LLC;
- offer-based price optimization, which pertains to marketing, OIP Techs., Inc. v. Amazon.com, Inc.; and
- structuring of a sales force or marketing company, which pertains to marketing or sales activities or behaviors, In re Ferguson.
- processing a credit application between a customer and dealer, where the business relation is the relationship between the customer and the dealer during the vehicle purchase, Credit Acceptance Corp. v. Westlake Services; and
- • processing information through a clearinghouse, where the business relation is the relationship between a party that submitted a credit application (e.g., a car dealer) and funding sources (e.g., banks) when processing credit applications, Dealertrack v. Huber.
其他還可參考：MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(A)-(B)
iii. “Managing Personal Behavior or Relationships or Interactions Between People”
「管理個人行為或眾人之間的關係或互動」，此類為社交活動、教學以及遵守規則或指示的範疇，相關案例如：
- a set of rules for playing a dice game, In re Marco Guldenaar Holding B.V.;
- voting, verifying the vote, and submitting the vote for tabulation, Voter Verified, Inc. v. Election Systems & Software LLC;
- assigning hair designs to balance head shape, In re Brown; and
- a series of instructions of how to hedge risk, Bilski v. Kappos.
其他可參考：MPEP 2106.04(a)(2)(II)(C)
C. Mental Processes
「心智程序」，就是執行在人類心智的概念，如觀察、評估、判斷與意見（observations, evaluations, judgments, and opinions），如何判斷專利範圍中引述了「心智程序」，如下幾種指導方針。
i. A Claim With Limitation(s) That Cannot Practically Be Performed In The Human Mind Does Not Recite A Mental Process
若專利範圍不能實際在人類心智所執行，就不是引述了心智程序（mental process），相關案例如：
- a claim to a method for calculating an absolute position of a GPS receiver and an absolute time of reception of satellite signals, where the claimed GPS receiver calculated pseudoranges that estimated the distance from the GPS receiver to a plurality of satellites, SiRF Technology, Inc. v. International Trade Commission;
- a claim to detecting suspicious activity by using network monitors and analyzing network packets, SRI Int’l, Inc. v. Cisco Systems, Inc.;
- a claim to a specific data encryption method for computer communication involving a several-step manipulation of data, Synopsys, Inc. v. Mentor Graphics Corp. (distinguishing the claims in TQP Development, LLC v. Intuit Inc.); and
- a claim to a method for rendering a halftone image of a digital image by comparing, pixel by pixel, the digital image against a blue noise mask, where the method required the manipulation of computer data structures (e.g., the pixels of a digital image and a two-dimensional array known as a mask) and the output of a modified computer data structure (a halftoned digital image), Research Corp. Techs. v. Microsoft Corp.
反之，專利範圍引述了「心智程序」就是專利關於觀察、評估、判斷與意見，案例如：
- a claim to “collecting information, analyzing it, and displaying certain results of the collection and analysis,” where the data analysis steps are recited at a high level of generality such that they could practically be performed in the human mind, Electric Power Group, LLC v. Alstom, S.A.;
- claims to “comparing BRCA sequences and determining the existence of alterations,” where the claims cover any way of comparing BRCA sequences such that the comparison steps can practically be performed in the human mind, University of Utah Research Foundation v. Ambry Genetics Corp.;
- a claim to collecting and comparing known information (claim 1), which are steps that can be practically performed in the human mind, Classen Immunotherapies, Inc. v. Biogen IDEC; and
- a claim to identifying head shape and applying hair designs, which is a process that can be practically performed in the human mind, In re Brown.
ii. A Claim That Requires A Computer May Still Recite A Mental Process
若以最廣而合理（BRI，參考說明書）地解釋專利範圍，當專利範圍全部為人類心智所執行，即便是專利範圍的步驟以電腦執行，仍判斷為引述了「心智程序」。根據判例，即便專利範圍並非全部都是心智程序，但其中僅使用了一般目的電腦（generic computer），仍算是引述了心智程序。
審查的原則是要參考說明書內容，判斷專利範圍描述的發明若為(1)僅以一般目的電腦所執行、(2)僅在電腦環境中，或是(3)僅使用電腦為工具執行其中概念，就判斷為引述了心智程序的發明。更者，相關的產品（如電腦系統、電腦可讀取媒體）也算是心智程序。
也就是，即便為電腦實現的系統，當相關流程被判斷為人所執行的，方法仍可能被視為抽象概念。
iii. A Claim That Encompasses A Human Performing The Step(s) Mentally With The Aid Of A Pen And Paper Recites A Mental Process
人類以紙筆等實體物品輔助執行的步驟為引述了心智程序（mental process），比如發明需要人以紙筆寫下特定資訊，就算是心智程序。
D. Tentative Abstract Idea Procedure
「暫時性」的抽象概念程序，這類專利範圍視為抽象概念。這類需要更多討論。
Ron
沒有留言:
張貼留言