【美國】如何判定專利請求項是否具有專利適格性？

根據美國專利法第101條，判定專利適格性之兩項標準在於(1). 請求項必須是四種法定類別（機械、製品、物質組成及方法）之一；且(2)請求項不得整體僅包含法定例外（judicial exception）之實質（例如：抽象概念、心智過程、自然法則或自然現象等）。有鑒於與專利適格性有關的Bilski案仍在最高法院上訴中，美國專利商標局於2009年八月公佈過渡性之審查判定原則。雖不具法定效力，但該判定原則讓原本複雜抽象之法條概念變得更具體，有助於專利相關人士之判讀。你不需要懂Bilski案正在爭論些什麼，但你可以根據這些審查判定原則事先診斷專利適格與否. 底下將佐以美國官方之實例，讓專利適格性之判斷更為具體與簡單。

產品請求項之判定（Product）

分析步驟

• Step 1 請求項之標的必須是一種機器（machine）、製品（manufacture）或物質組成 （composition of matter）.

• Step 2 請求項不得整體只涵蓋法定例外的實質（例如：抽象概念、自然法則、心智過程、數學運算、科學原理等），而必需有實際的應用

方法請求項之判定（Process）

分析步驟

• Step 1 請求項之標的必須是一種方法（process）.

• Step 2 請求項必須通過機器或轉換測試（machine or transform test），以確保該方法請求項被限定到一種特定實際應用

根據機器/轉換測試（M/T測試），請求之方法必須是：

1. 與特殊機器或裝置有連結（machine-implemented）；或

2. 將一特殊物品特殊地轉換（transform）到另一種狀態或東西。

值得注意的是，存在機器或轉換之技術特徵不必然能通過該測試，關鍵在於該技術特徵必須是有用的限制（meaningful limits），而不只是一項無關緊要的額外解決手段（extra-solution activity）。

範例說明

底下的五個例子基本上都含有共同的主要技術特徵，惟因部分特徵有些許不同，卻決定了其是否具有專利適格性。

Example 1

Claim:  A machine for evaluating search results, comprising:

-a microprocessor coupled to a memory;

-wherein the microprocessor is programmed to evaluate search results by:

Ÿ -sorting the results into groups based on a first characteristic;

Ÿ - ranking the results based on a second characteristic using a mathematical formula [f]; and

Ÿ  -comparing the ranked results to a predetermined list of desired results to evaluate the success of the search.

Analysis:

1. Machine

2. Mathematical algorithm>>judicial exception>>practical application

3. The judicial exception is not all

Answer: Eligible

Example 2

Claim:  A non-transitory computer-readable storage medium with an executable program stored thereon, wherein the program instructs a microprocessor to perform the following steps:

-sorting results of a search into groups based on a first characteristic;

- ranking the results based on a second characteristic using a mathematical formula [f]; and

- comparing the ranked results to a predetermined list of desired results to evaluate the success of the search.

Analysis:

1. Non-transitory storage medium>> Article

2. Mathematical algorithm>>judicial exception>>practical application

3. The judicial exception is not all

Answer: Eligible

Example 3

Claim:  A method of evaluating search results, comprising:

-sorting results of a search into groups based on a first characteristic;

- ranking the results based on a second characteristic; and

- comparing the ranked results to a predetermined list of desired results to evaluate the success of the search.

Analysis:

1. Method>>process

2. No machine required

3. No transformation

Answer: Not Eligible

Example 4

Claim:  A method of evaluating search results, comprising:

-sorting results of a search into groups based on a first characteristic;

- ranking the results based on a second characteristic; and

- comparing, using a microprocessor, the ranked results to a predetermined list of desired results to evaluate the success of the search.

Analysis:

1. Method>>process

2. Comparing step>> particular machine required

3. Comparing step >>central

Answer: Eligible

Example 5

Claim:  A method of evaluating search results, comprising:

-obtaining the search results by electronically downloading the results from a database;

-sorting results of a search into groups based on a first characteristic;

- ranking the results based on a second characteristic; and

- comparing the ranked results to a predetermined list of desired results to evaluate the success of the search.

Analysis:

1. method>>process

2. Obtaining step>> particular machine required

3. Obtaining step>> not central

4. No transformation

Answer: Not Eligible