PLI Presents Bilski v. Kappos Program With CLE

By Gene Quinn
June 20, 2010

Eventually we are going to have a decision from the Supreme Court in Bilski v. Kappos, or we will know that the case will be held over until the next term of the Court, which beings in October 2010. The current Supreme Court term comes to an end on June 28, 2010, so something will soon happen worth discussing.

From the shameless commerce division, with at least a dose of self promotion, I can announce that PLI has selected Hot Topic Briefing dates for a Bilski v. Kappos audio briefing, which comes with CLE credit. Registration will not be open until we have a decision date, but the dates have been selected, with all faculty clear to participate. The dates are:

  • If decision on Monday June 21, PLI program on June 23, 2010 from 1pm to 2:30pm
  • If decision on Thursday, June 24, PLI program on June 28, 2010 from 1pm to 2:30pm
  • If decision on Monday, June 28, 2010, PLI prgram on June 30, 2010 or July 1, 2010 (to be announced) from 1pm to 2:30pm

In the unlikely but possible event that there is no decision reached by the Supreme Court will hold an audio discussion, perhaps for distribution via podcast (TBA).  Unfortunately, no CLE credit will be available for the briefing should the case be held over until next term.

Obviously, if there is no decision from the Supreme Court the program will be quite different.  We will indulge in speculation, but also provide our best advice on what can and should be done with applications that need to be filed or are pending with Bilski-like subject matter.  We will also provide our best advice on how litigations and appeals will be impacted and what, if anything plaintiffs and defendants can and should do.

Working with the assumption that we will have a decision on or before June 28, 2010, what follows is the PLI program description.

Bilski v. Kappos: The Supreme Court Rules on Patentable Subject Matter

The long-awaited decision of Bilski v. Kappos has finally been handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court. This important decision significantly impacts anyone with an interest in whether business method, software, e-commerce and/or medical diagnostic technology is patentable. With many of the Justices likely to be on the bench for years to come the Bilski decision gives us important clues about what to expect as innovation continues to push the envelope and evolve. With biotechnology advances and communication technologies never before imagined possible the fundamental question of what is patentable subject matter is likely to increase in importance, and Bilski will likely be the first of many difficult questions facing the courts in the years to come.

Please plan to join Scott M. Alter of Faegre & Benson LLP and Douglas R. Nemec of Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom LLP, co-chairs of PLI’s 4th Annual Patent Law Institute, Gene Quinn, patent attorney blogger and a principal lecturer in the PLI Patent Bar Review course and John M. White, PLI’s Director of Patent Professional Development as they discuss the implications of this ground-breaking decision, and what it may mean for your practice or your company.

Topics to be addressed include:

* What does the decision mean? What is left unanswered?
* Application drafting strategies to satisfy the Supreme Court’s test
* Prosecution strategies for pending applications
* Patentee litigation tips for surviving 101 challenges
* Defendant litigation tips for challenging patents under the Supreme Court’s test

So save the dates for now, and check back to for continuing coverage of Bilski v. Kappos.  The plan is to post something immediately upon the decision being handed down, which will be followed up by additional information and commentary throughout decision day and the days that follow.

Anyone interested in writing an op-ed style article about Bilski v. Kappos please send me a message using this contact form.  We would love to publish any and all original contributions, hopefully with a variety of perspectives.

The Author

Gene Quinn

Gene Quinn is a Patent Attorney and Editor and President & CEO ofIPWatchdog, Inc.. Gene founded in 1999. Gene is also a principal lecturer in the PLI Patent Bar Review Course and Of Counsel to the law firm of Berenato & White, LLC. Gene’s specialty is in the area of strategic patent consulting, patent application drafting and patent prosecution. He consults with attorneys facing peculiar procedural issues at the Patent Office, advises investors and executives on patent law changes and pending litigation matters, and works with start-up businesses throughout the United States and around the world, primarily dealing with software and computer related innovations. is admitted to practice law in New Hampshire, is a Registered Patent Attorney and is also admitted to practice before the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. CLICK HERE to send Gene a message.

Warning & Disclaimer: The pages, articles and comments on do not constitute legal advice, nor do they create any attorney-client relationship. The articles published express the personal opinion and views of the author and should not be attributed to the author’s employer, clients or the sponsors of Read more.

Discuss this

There are currently 4 Comments comments.

  1. Tami June 21, 2010 2:00 am

    Dear Gene-
    Will the audio briefing be available for people outside the US (with no CLE credit)? Will they be available for downloading after the date of the program? Where can I inquire regarding the costs?


  2. EG June 21, 2010 10:30 am


    Pete Zura’s blog just noted (with a “sighn”) still no decision in Bilski.

  3. patent leather June 21, 2010 11:04 am

    Arrrrghh Gene, I came upon this page and first read the portion in grey, “The long-awaited decision of Bilski v. Kappos has finally been handed down by the U.S. Supreme Court…” it gave me the chills for a few seconds while I was trying to find the holding. You owe me a tea to calm my nerves… 🙂

  4. Gene Quinn June 22, 2010 3:45 pm

    Sorry PL. I didn’t even give that a thought. I was wondering why a PLI advertisement was getting so many reads. I wish I could claim to have done that on purpose. That would have been clever of me. Alas, it was without thinking. I just cut and pasted the promo text we agreed upon for the program.

    The wait continues! Perhaps tomorrow!