Blurring the Line Between Law and Fact in Patent Eligibility

The article explores the complexities of patent law, particularly in the context of patent eligibility and the traditional separation of law and fact in American jurisprudence. It highlights how the treatment of eligibility as a legal question can obscure the underlying factual analyses needed to determine conventionality at the time of invention. This refusal to clearly differentiate between law and fact potentially undermines evidentiary standards and complicates judicial reasoning, raising significant questions about procedural frameworks as demonstrated in BBiTV's recent petition for certiorari.

If the law is against you, pound on the facts. If the facts are against you, pound on the law. If both are against you, pound on the table.

Read at Patently-O