Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/09pdf/08-964.pdf
Page Number: 5

Cite as:  561 U. S. ____ (2010) 

1 

Opinion of the Court 

NOTICE:  This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the
preliminary  print  of  the  United  States  Reports.  Readers  are  requested  to
notify the Reporter of Decisions, Supreme Court of the United States, Wash-
ington,  D. C.  20543,  of  any  typographical  or  other  formal  errors,  in  order
that corrections may be made before the preliminary print goes to press. 

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES 

_________________ 

No. 08–964 
_________________ 

BERNARD L. BILSKI AND RAND A. WARSAW, 

PETITIONERS v. DAVID J. KAPPOS, UNDER 

SECRETARY OF COMMERCE FOR INTEL- 

LECTUAL PROPERTY AND DIRECTOR, 

PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF

APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

[June 28, 2010]

 JUSTICE  KENNEDY  delivered  the  opinion  of  the  Court, 

except as to Parts II–B–2 and II–C–2.* 

The question in this case turns on whether a patent can
be issued for a claimed invention designed for the business
world.  The  patent  application  claims  a  procedure  for 
instructing  buyers  and  sellers  how  to  protect  against  the 
risk of price fluctuations in a discrete section of the econ-
omy.  Three  arguments  are  advanced  for  the  proposition 
that  the  claimed  invention  is  outside  the  scope  of  patent
law: (1) it is not tied to a machine and does not transform
an article; (2) it involves a method of conducting business; 
and (3) it is merely an abstract idea.  The Court of Appeals
ruled  that  the  first  mentioned  of  these,  the  so-called  ma-
chine-or-transformation  test,  was  the  sole  test  to  be  used 
for determining the patentability of a “process” under the
Patent Act, 35 U. S. C. §101. 

—————— 

* JUSTICE SCALIA does not join Parts II–B–2 and II–C–2.