The Danger of Silence: The Negative Effect of Supreme Court Hesitance to Establish a Bright-Line Rule for Determining Patent Subject Matter Eligibility

Authors

Amber N. Roibu

Abstract

Ambiguity surrounding the interpretation of 35 U.S.C. § 101 and the ultimate application of the Alice/Mayo standard for determining patent subject matter eligibility has long plagued the courts, practitioners, and USPTO examiners alike. Maintaining a standard that leads to sheer confusion and, as a result, inconsistent rulings severely muddles the ultimate goal of patent law, to promote innovation. The Supreme Court has been presented with ample opportunities to address these issues, with the Solicitor General consistently recommending that it hear cases that deal with patent-eligibility debates. Nonetheless, the Supreme Court's continued hesitancy to grant certiorari on these cases only further complicates an already complicated standard. Without judicial guidance and congressional intervention, this ambiguous standard will continue to stifle innovation and discourage innovative minds from seeking protection for their inventions. Accordingly, a detailed and proactive amendment to the standard is not only desired but gravely required.

Recommended Citation

Roibu, Amber N. (2024) "The Danger of Silence: The Negative Effect of Supreme Court Hesitance to Establish a Bright-Line Rule for Determining Patent Subject Matter Eligibility," Touro Law Review: Vol. 39: No. 4, Article 13.
Available at: https://digitalcommons.tourolaw.edu/lawreview/vol39/iss4/13