Skip to main content

Leveraging Instabilities in the Law of Patentable Subject Matter to Create Winning Outcomes

Original Air Date 1.26.2022

In 1980, the Supreme Court held that patentable subject matter “include[s] anything under the sun that is made by man.” However, in a series of cases culminating in Alice Corp. Pty. Ltd. v. CLS Bank International, 573 U.S. 208 (2014), the Court stepped back from this position and instead set forth a two-step test for assessing whether a claim is directed to patentable subject matter. The fallout from Alice and its progeny has been the invalidation of countless patents in many different arts. But has one of the Court’s more recent approaches to statutory interpretation fundamentally undermined Alice? If not, what does it mean for a claim to be “directed to” a law of nature, a product of nature, or an abstract idea? Seasoned practitioners James R. Major, D.Phil., of Counsel at Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP, and Aaron L.J. Pereira, of Counsel at Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP, provide insights and practical tips to overcome the conundrum of patentable subject matter.

Presented by: James Major of Stradley Ronon Stevens & Young, LLP and Aaron Pereira of Panitch Schwarze Belisario & Nadel LLP


AIPLA is an approved provider by most states requiring CLE. Each webinar requires individual approval, and each state has different approval guidelines so webinars may not be pre-approved. For information on CLE accreditation, please contact our CLE Department at cle@aipla.org.