We posted Tuesday about the McRO case, and here is some more commentary for consideration, which we posted on our firm's web site, too. One very notable point is that different from prior Federal Circuit decisions since Alice, here the claims were found patent eligible even where the claimed improvement was incorporated in software processed by a general purpose computer and did not result in an improvement in the technological performance of a computer, computer functionality, or computer network. Rather, even when the claimed improvement is not to the computer itself, a claim may still be patent eligible when the improvement allows computers to produce an outcome that previously only could be produced by an intuitive human process.
If you are unable to access the hyperlink above, you may read the article on our website by pasting the following URL into your browser: http://bannerwitcoff.com/news/1456/.
Our full analysis is here by Banner & Witcoff attorneys Ross A. Dannenberg, Aseet Patel and Peter Nigrelli.