Anthony John Liberto v. State

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that claims directed to “a new and useful laboratory technique for preserving hepato-cytes,” a type of liver cell, were not abstract
• holding that claims are “directed to” a patent-ineligible concept “when they amount[] to nothing more than observing or identifying the ineligible concept itself”
• holding that “the natural ability of the subject matter to undergo the process does not make the claim ‘directed to’ that natural ability”
• holding that claims directed to “a new and 21 useful laboratory technique for preserving hepatocytes,” a type of liver cell, were not abstract
• holding that a “new and useful laboratory technique for preserving [a type of liver cell]” was patent-eligible subject matter
• finding that a “new and useful laboratory technique for preserving [a type of liver cell]” was patent eligible subject matter

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).