This article originally appeared in World Intellectual Property Review online, October 24, 2022.
A recent case has only added to the clamor for clarity on Section 101, says Phil Harris of Holland & Hart.
In yet another interesting patent eligibility case, the Supreme Court has once again requested input and insight from the US solicitor general.
The patentee in Tropp v. Travel Sentry obtained claims directed to “[a] method of improving airline luggage inspection by a luggage screening entity.”
The claims included features of “making available to consumers a special lock having a combination lock portion and a master key lock portion,” and “marketing the special lock to the consumers in a manner that conveys to the consumers that the special lock will be subjected by the luggage screening entity [e.g., the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)],” among others.
In this World Intellectual Property Review guest article, Holland & Hart partner Phil Harris, whose practice focuses on preparing and prosecuting U.S. and foreign patent applications and contesting intellectual property disputes, explores several recent eligibility cases.
Please click here to read the full article (subscription required): Why Patent Eligibility is Ripe for SCOTUS Review.