Section 101 of US Patent Act (“35 U.S.C. § 101”) provides that one
may obtain patent for invention or discovery of any new and useful subject-matter (process,
machine, manufacture etc.) or for any new and useful improvement thereof. In a pending
case before it, United States Supreme Court (“Supreme Court) has to decide
whether claims related to ‘computer-implemented
inventions’ are
patent-eligible subject matter within the meaning of 35 U.S.C. § 101.
Invoking the writ
jurisdiction (writ of certiorari)
of the Supreme Court under 28 U.S. Code § 1254(1),
Alice Corporation Pty. Ltd. (“Petitioner”) has filed a petition against the
decision given in an en banc hearing.
The disputed invention in the present case relates to a ‘computerised system for creating
and exchanging financial instruments such as derivates’ (“INVENTCO system”). One aspect of
INVENTCO system can be described as follows:
“.....specific
computer system and computerized process for the execution of a previously
agreed-upon exchange, known as “settlement”
To understand it
more clearly, prior to the execution of an agreement to exchange financial instruments or assets, there is a stage where
parties merely agree to execute the exchange. There may be
situations where one of the parties, at the time of actual execution or settlement of the agreement, performs its
obligation(s) but other party does not. So as to address this situation of risk, the disputed invention
provides for a specifically
programmed computer. Following are the features of this computerised system:
