Citation[]
Ex parte Egan, 129 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 23 (Pat. Off. Bd. App. 1960).
Factual Background[]
The claimed process was for measuring the depth of well bores. It involved certain procedures such as (1) plotting one set of values on the first chart; (2) scaling off and reading from the chart a second set of values in a particular way on a second chart; and (3) using this second chart to obtain the desired set of end-values. This process, which is analogous to a method of operating a computer, could be practiced by an unskilled operator who did not understand the mathematical processes involved in solving difficult problems in solid geometry.
Patent Office Board of Appeals Proceedings[]
The claim was ruled patentable because a process of utilizing apparatus in a particular way in get the useful result of doing tedious, time-consuming work by relatively unskilled workers is a statutory process. The applicant's precalculated charts, which could be looked upon as analogous to a calculating machine, were ruled a manufacture under the patent statute because they were specified as a necessary and essential part of the method. The court said:
| “ | We agree that the process under consideration is properly analogous to a method of operating a computer, since the charts employed are quite analogous to a preconstructed computer. The method of operations in operating a computer are distinct from the method of computation itself. It is perfectly possible to have a patentable process in which apparatus is used in a particular way to get a useful result.[1] | ” |
The appellate board accepted the Abrams rules as established law.
References[]
- ↑ 129 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) at 26.