Calls Increasing for Clarity or Revocation of Rules Governing Patent Eligibility

This week saw renewed energy in the call for abolition of Section 101 of the Patent Act.  Read the Law360 article on a former USPTO Director's statement here.  Per the article, David Kappos says decisions like Alice on the issue are a "real mess", and threaten patent protection for key U.S. industries.

Polsinelli shareholder Q. Todd Dickinson is also a former Director of the USPTO, and commented Monday:

Many of us in the patent community have been concerned for some time about the manner in which the Supreme Court’s decisions in Mayo, Myriad, and Alice have been applied by the courts and at the USPTO to invalidate inventions we believe to be patent eligible under Section 101 of the Patent Act, and worthy of protection. There are a number of ways to mitigate the impact of these decisions and protect the patent system. Amending Section 101 is one approach. Clarifying or limiting the Alice decision is another. Abolition of Section 101 in its entirety, as proposed by Former Director Kappos, is a novel approach, but might also achieve that goal. The bottom line is that we need clarity in the rules governing patent eligibility, particularly of biotechnology and software inventions, so that critical innovation can be protected in the US.