In Re Bilski En Banc Oral Arguments.
Oral arguments were heard today at the CAFC for In re Bilski. The CAFC had earlier ordered an en banc hearing of Bilksi to address the following questions:
(1) Whether claim 1 of the [Bilski] patent application claims patent-eligible subject matter under 35 U.S.C. § 101?
(2) What standard should govern in determining whether a process is patent-eligible subject matter under section 101?
(3) Whether the claimed subject matter is not patent-eligible because it constitutes an abstract idea or mental process; when does a claim that contains both mental and physical steps create patent-eligible subject matter?
(4) Whether a method or process must result in a physical transformation of an article or be tied to a machine to be patent-eligible subject matter under section 101?
(5) Whether it is appropriate to reconsider State Street Bank & Trust Co. v. Signature Financial Group, Inc., 149 F.3d 1368 (Fed. Cir. 1998), and AT&T Corp. v. Excel Communications, Inc., 172 F.3d 1352 (Fed. Cir. 1999), in this case and, if so, whether those cases should be overruled in any respect?
Gene Quinn at PLI attended the oral arguments, and has a great post on the conduct of the judges, the opposing parties, and the amici present for the arguments here.
Professor Crouch at Patently-O reads his tea leaves here.
Listen to the oral arguments here.
See our previous AT! post providing background on the case here.