CLE
Daniel Cole
Daniel Cole Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C.
Advanced Patents: Examining 101 Rejections To Strengthen Your Applications
Video play button
Announcement!

You are watching a webinar preview. To view the full webinar, log in to your Justia Connect account or sign up for free.

Overview AI Webinar Summary
Advanced Patents: Examining 101 Rejections To Strengthen Your Applications

This advanced patent prosecution seminar will go into a deep dive on 101 rejections. Users will learn how to recognize when a 101 rejection is likely, how best to prepare, and how to respond. Each concept will be reviewed in-depth.

Topics covered include:
Intellectual Property
Agenda:
  • Introduction & Overview of 101 Process
    • Chambliss intro
    • Overview of how the USPTO makes 101 decisions

  • Machine, Process, and Manufacture
    • Overview of items courts have said are not machine, process and manufacture
    • Discussion of hypothetical example

  • Law of Nature Exception
    • Discussion of law behind Law of Nature Exception
    • Distillation of warning signs disclosure might include a law of nature

  • Significantly Different Characteristics for Law of Nature
    • Discussion of when significantly different and when not
    • Discussion of multiple hypothetical examples

  • Abstract Idea Exception
    • Discussion of law behind abstract idea
    • Discussion of types of abstract ideas with examples of each
    • Discussion of several hypothetical examples

  • Practical Application
    • Discussion of how the USPTO decides if exception is integrated into a practical application with examples
    • Distillation of how to increase chance USPTO will decide you have integrated into a practical application
    • Discussion of why questionable if it will be held up by courts
    • Discussion of how new guidance may make USPTO NBP Example 28, which USPTO previously held as unpatentable, patentable

  • Significantly More
    • Discussion of law behind significantly more for Laws of Nature and Abstract Ideas
    • Distillation on how to increase likelihood USPTO will find you have significantly more for Abstract Ideas and Laws of Nature
    • Final Takeaways

  • Q&A
Read More ›
Duration of this webinar: 60 minutes
Originally broadcast: February 9, 2026 10:00 AM PT
Webinar Highlights

This webinar is divided into section summaries, which you can scan for key points and then dive into the sections that interest you the most.

Introduction
Daniel Cole, a patent attorney, is introduced as the speaker, focusing on intellectual property law, particularly in chemical and biochemical sectors. Daniel's presentation will address the complexities of patent eligibility under Section 101, specifically how to avoid rejections by understanding the criteria for patentability. He outlines the importance of recognizing potential issues during the patent filing process and preparing to address rejections. The presentation will delve into changes made in 2019 regarding the patent office's approach to Section 101 analysis. Daniel plans to guide the audience through a detailed examination of the steps involved in determining patent eligibility.
Understanding 101 Rejections
Daniel explains the concept of a 101 exception to patentability, focusing on claims directed to laws of nature, natural phenomena, or abstract ideas. He discusses the importance of integrating exceptions into practical applications to overcome 101 rejections. The presentation covers strategies for ensuring claims are categorized as processes, machines, manufactures, or compositions of matter to avoid ineligibility. Daniel uses case examples, such as In re Ferguson and In re Jittin, to illustrate challenges in patenting business methods and signals. He emphasizes the need for clear, step-by-step claims to navigate the 101 analysis successfully.
Patent Eligibility and Natural Products
Daniel discusses the challenges of patenting natural products and the exceptions related to laws of nature. He explains that mixtures of natural products, like in the Parker v. Flock case, often face patentability issues. The presentation covers strategies to demonstrate significantly different characteristics from natural products to bypass exceptions. He uses the Myriad case as an example of how modified DNA can be patentable due to structural changes. The discussion includes the limitations of patenting diagnostic techniques and the potential benefits of keeping them as trade secrets.
Abstract Ideas and Practical Applications
Daniel explores the concept of abstract ideas and their impact on patent eligibility, referencing the 2019 USPTO guidance. He outlines the categories of abstract ideas, including mathematical concepts, methods of organizing human activity, and mental processes. The presentation discusses how claims that are result-focused or cover broad solutions may be deemed abstract ideas. Daniel provides examples of abstract ideas, such as algorithms and business methods, and their challenges in patenting. He emphasizes the importance of integrating claims into practical applications to overcome abstract idea rejections. The discussion includes strategies for demonstrating improvements to technology or technical fields to support patent eligibility. Daniel highlights the role of the background section in patent applications to emphasize practical applications and improvements.

Please note this AI-generated summary provides a general overview of the webinar but may not capture all details, nuances, or the exact words of the speaker. For complete accuracy, please refer to the original webinar recording.

Speaker
Daniel Cole
Daniel Cole Of Counsel
Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C.

For over a decade, Daniel Cole has guided independent inventors, startups, college professors, industry professionals, and established businesses through the complexities of intellectual property law. As a registered patent attorney with a specialized focus on chemical and biochemical companies, he evaluates patent and trademark eligibility, drafts IP applications, and advocates for clients in both protecting their rights and defending against unjust infringement claims. Read More ›

Continuing Legal Education (CLE) Credits

*CLE credit is only available to Justia Connect Pros. Not a Pro? Upgrade today>>

Alaska CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: February 8, 2031

California CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: June 30, 2026

Hawaii CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: February 8, 2028

Illinois CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: February 8, 2028

New Jersey CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.20 General

Earn Credit Until: February 8, 2027

Ohio CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2026

Pennsylvania CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 Substantive Law, Practice, and Procedure

Earn Credit Until: February 8, 2028

Texas CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.00 General

Earn Credit Until: January 31, 2027

West Virginia CLE

Status: Approved

Credits: 1.20 General

Earn Credit Until: December 31, 2029


This presentation is approved for one hour of General CLE credit in Alaska, one hour of General CLE credit in California, one hour of General CLE credit in Hawaii, one hour of General CLE credit in Illinois, one hour of General CLE credit in Ohio, one hour of Substantive Law, Practice, and Procedure CLE credit in Pennsylvania, and one hour of General CLE credit in West Virginia. This program has been approved by the Board on Continuing Legal Education of the Supreme Court of New Jersey for 1.20 hours of total CLE credit. This course has been approved for Minimum Continuing Legal Education credit by the State Bar of Texas Committee on MCLE in the amount of 1.00 credit hours.

Justia only reports attendance in jurisdictions in which a particular Justia CLE Webinar is officially accredited. Lawyers may need to self-submit their certificates for CLE credit in jurisdictions not listed above.

Note that CLE credit, including partial credit, cannot be earned outside of the relevant accreditation period. To earn credit for a course, a lawyer must watch the entire course within the relevant accreditation period. Lawyers who have viewed a presentation multiple times may not be able to claim credit in their jurisdiction more than once. Justia reserves the right, at its discretion, to grant an attendee partial or no credit, in accordance with viewing duration and other methods of verifying course completion.

At this time, Justia only offers CLE courses officially accredited in certain states. Lawyers may generate a generic attendance certificate to self-submit credit in their own jurisdiction, but Justia does not guarantee that lawyers will receive their desired CLE credit through the self-submission or reciprocity process.

Looking for CLE credit? Visit CLE Dashboard CLE Accreditation
Watch Related Videos
CLE
Daniel Cole
Daniel Cole Chambliss, Bahner & Stophel, P.C.
Basics of Patent Law Stop, Think, Call — Knowing When To Consult a Patent Attorney
Watch Now
CLE
Bao Tran
Bao Tran PatentPC
Generative AI in Patent Drafting and Prosecution
Watch Now