In re Comiskey (Fed. Cir. 2009) (Revised Panel Opinion)(En Banc Order)
After a request for en banc rehearing, the original Federal Circuit panel has revised its decision in Comsikey – erasing the “misunderstood” phrases of the original opinion linking Sections 101 (subject matter) and 103 (nonobviousness). The original opinion implicitly held that any portion of an invention that would constitute nonstatutory subject matter would be considered de facto obvious. [Link]
The new opinion finds that Comiskey’s method claims do not present patentable subject matter and remanded the case to the PTO to determine the subject matter eligibility of the system claims. The Federal Circuit refused to consider nonobviousness issues – even though nonobviousness was the sole issue presented in the original appeal. Subject matter eligibility had been raised sua sponte by the panel.
Judges Moore and Newman each dissented from the en banc order. Judge Moore argued that the decision violates the court’s “well established precedent that this court will not consider new grounds of rejecting patent claims on appeal.”