The Federal Circuit's first precedential machine-learning eligibility ruling holds that applying off-the-shelf models to a new data environment claims an abstract idea under § 101.
A unanimous Supreme Court held that implementing an abstract idea on a generic computer adds nothing patentable, extending the Mayo framework to software and business methods.
A unanimous Supreme Court held that correlations between drug-metabolite levels and dosing were unpatentable laws of nature, and built the two-step test that would reshape Section 101.
The Supreme Court rejected hedging as an unpatentable abstract idea while refusing to make the machine-or-transformation test the exclusive gatekeeper for process patents.
