Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/11pdf/10-1150.pdf
Page Number: 20.0

16  MAYO COLLABORATIVE SERVICES v. PROMETHEUS 

LABORATORIES, INC. 
Opinion of the Court 

  Finally,  in  Benson  the  Court  considered  the  patentabil­
ity  of  a  mathematical  process  for  converting  binary-coded 
decimal  numerals  into  pure  binary  numbers  on  a  general
purpose digital computer.  The claims “purported to cover
any use of the claimed method in a general-purpose digital
computer  of  any  type.”  409  U. S.,  at  64,  65.    The  Court 
recognized that “ ‘a novel and useful structure created with 
the aid of knowledge of scientific truth’ ” might be patent­
able.  Id., at 67 (quoting Mackay Radio, 306 U. S., at 94).
But  it  held  that  simply  implementing  a  mathematical
principle  on  a  physical  machine,  namely  a  computer,  was
not  a  patentable  application  of  that  principle.  For  the 
mathematical formula had “no substantial practical appli­
cation  except  in  connection  with  a  digital  computer.” 
Benson,  supra,  at  71.    Hence  the  claim  (like  the  claims 
before  us)  was  overly  broad;  it  did  not  differ  significantly 
from a claim that just said “apply the algorithm.” 

3 
The  Court  has  repeatedly  emphasized  this  last  men­
tioned  concern,  a  concern  that  patent  law  not  inhibit 
further discovery by improperly tying up the future use of
laws  of  nature.    Thus,  in  Morse  the  Court  set  aside  as 
unpatentable  Samuel  Morse’s  general  claim  for  “ ‘the  use 
of the motive power of the electric or galvanic current . . . 
however  developed,  for  making  or  printing  intelligible 
characters, letters, or signs, at any distances,’ ” 15 How., at
86. 	 The Court explained: 

“For aught that we now know some future inventor, in
the onward march of science, may discover a mode of 
writing or printing at a distance by means of the elec­
tric or galvanic current, without using any part of the
process or combination set forth in the plaintiff ’s spec­
ification.  His invention may be less complicated—less
liable  to  get  out  of  order—less  expensive  in  construc­
tion,  and  in  its  operation.    But  yet  if  it  is  covered  by