Patents, Software

Software Patent Applications in View of Ex Parte Rodriguez

On October 1st, 2009, the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a precedential opinion in Ex Parte Rodriguez rejecting an appealed LSI Logic Corporation patent application for its lack of disclosure of a specific algorithm for carrying out the claimed software invention.  The Board felt that the specification of the patent application did not “enable those skilled in the art to make and use the . . . invention without undue experimentation.”  The opinion was remarkable for reasons that go beyond its content.  The Board convened a panel of seven judges instead of the normal three, and chose to issue the opinion under an operating procedure that makes the opinion a precedent for deciding future appeals within the Patent and Trademark Office as well as for patent examiners in examining applications.

The patent statute requires a patent applicant to “enable” his or her invention by explaining in the patent application how the invention works so that others can make and use the invention by reading the issued patent. With software inventions, enablement can present a challenge because most patentees don’t want to include details about computer programming code in their patent applications. While it is certainly possible to provide a good, enabling disclosure of a software invention without resorting to computer program code listings, the Patent and Trademark Office may have signaled in Rodriguez that software patent applications that disclose the details of implementing an invention by presenting and describing only simple functional diagrams will be subject to more scrutiny regarding whether such an application meets the enablement requirements of the patent statute.

In Rodriguez, the Board seemed bothered by the fact that the patent application did not include any working examples of what seemed to be a highly complex invention.  In order to provide working examples of a software invention, patentees should consider including relatively detailed flowcharts or software block diagrams.  For software inventions that involve complex calculations, a walk-through of the relevant mathematical equations is appropriate.  Finally, the Patent and Trademark Office regulations provide for the submission of actual computer program code as part of a patent application.  Where an invention is embedded in a complex software product with diverse functions, it may be difficult or completely impractical to disclose computer program code without revealing trade secrets that are unrelated to the claimed invention.  However, in appropriate cases, the inclusion of computer program code, especially source code, should be considered, as there is no easier or more certain way to provide a good “working example” of a software-implemented invention.

Steven Phillips

About Steven Phillips

Registered patent attorney Steve Phillips has considerable experience in patent application preparation and infringement analysis in the areas of electronics, semiconductors, telecommunications and software. His practice also includes international patent matters, especially European and Patent Cooperation Treaty practice, as well as in transactional aspects of both patent and copyright law.


No comments yet.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Welcome to the MVA IP Law Blog!

Moore & Van Allen’s IP Law Blog covers hot topics in U.S. and international intellectual property law and provides insight into critical litigation, legislative, regulatory and policy developments. In today’s highly competitive and rapidly developing business climate, technological advancements and the protection of intellectual property rights are paramount concerns common to companies, universities, and individuals operating in nearly every industry.

Connect to Recent Authors

  • Matt Witsil:  View Matt Witsil's Bio View Matt Witsil's LinkedIn profile
  • Emmett Weindruch: View Emmett Weindruch's Bio View Emmett Weindruch's LinkedIn profile
  • Todd Taylor:  View Todd Taylor's Bio View Todd Taylor's LinkedIn profile
  • John Slaughter:  View John Slaughter's Bio View John Slaughter's LinkedIn profile
  • Nick Russell:  View Nick Russell's Bio
  • Ellen Rubel:  View Ellen Rubel's Bio View Ellen Rubel's LinkedIn profile
  • Esther Queen:  View Esther Queen's Bio View Esther Queen's LinkedIn profile
  • Steve Phillips:  View Steve Phillip's Bio View Steve Phillip's LinkedIn profile
  • Chuck Moore:  View Chuck Moore's Bio View Chuck Moore's LinkedIn profile
  • Mark Wilson:  View Mark Wilson's Bio View Mark Wilson's LinkedIn profile
  • Chris Knors:  View Chris Knors' Bio View Chris Knors' LinkedIn profile
  • Jeff Gray:  View Jeff Gray's Bio View Jeff Gray's LinkedIn profile
  • Andy Gerschutz:  View Andy Gerschutz's Bio View Andy Gerschutz's LinkedIn profile
  • Jim Edwards:  View Jim Edwards' Bio View Jim Edwards' LinkedIn profile

  • Subscribe to Blog via Email

    Follow MVA


    Blog Topics


    Our IP Practice

    Moore & Van Allen is located in the Research Triangle and Charlotte, North Carolina – two emerging hubs in the areas of biotech and energy. Moore & Van Allen’s intellectual property lawyers are highly-skilled and innovative in their approach to assisting clients in using patents, trademarks, copyrights, trade secrets and technology to achieve their business objectives.

    Our “business focused” team combines legal know-how with the technical proficiency and industry experience necessary to navigate our clients through matters in areas as diverse as nuclear power, navigation systems, microprocessor design, pollution control, pharmaceuticals, semi-conductor manufacturing, food processing, telecommunications, internet applications, computer software, business methods and consumer products.

    We offer a full range of patent, trademark, and copyright services, and our team is equipped with IP litigators with substantial state, federal, and international experience. To benefit and best serve our clients, we leverage our ongoing working relationships with highly qualified intellectual property practitioners and agents in virtually every country in the world. Read More About Our Practice and Meet the MVA IP Team.


    No Attorney-Client Relationship Created by Use of this Website: Neither your receipt of information from this website, nor your use of this website to contact Moore & Van Allen or one of its attorneys creates an attorney-client relationship between you and Moore & Van Allen. As a matter of policy, Moore & Van Allen does not accept a new client without first investigating for possible conflicts of interests and obtaining a signed engagement letter. (Moore & Van Allen may, for example, already represent another party involved in your matter.) Accordingly, you should not use this website to provide confidential information about a legal matter of yours to Moore & Van Allen.

    No Legal Advice Intended: This website includes information about legal issues and legal developments. Such materials are for informational purposes only and may not reflect the most current legal developments. These informational materials are not intended, and should not be taken, as legal advice on any particular set of facts or circumstances. You should contact an attorney for advice on specific legal problems. (Read All)