Business Methods Patent Eligibility: An Examiner’s View and a Plea for Certainty

This paper will explore the difficulty a patent examiner faces when applying the Supreme Court’s two-step test put forth in the Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank Int’l decision, i.e. whether there is an abstract idea, and if so, whether the claims contain something that amounts to “significantly more”. The case law that has led to the two-step framework will be briefly discussed, as will the USPTO’s 35 U.S.C. § 101 guidance. Real-world examples and the outcomes reached, if any, will be discussed with particular attention to how an examiner determines whether an abstract idea is recited, and the thought processes involved, and whether the abstract idea is overcome by recitation of something in the claims that amounts to “significantly more”. As hopefully will be clear after review of the examples, and given the complexity of the issue and the amount of time and effort spent by the examiner on these § 101 issues, the author will contend that § 101 needs to be amended to afford more particularity and certainty to applicants, examiners, courts, and the public at large. Lastly, potential proposals of how § 101 could be amended to afford more certainty and predictability will be briefly presented

Gain control with A-type potassium current: IA as a switch between divisive and subtractive inhibition

Neurons process information by transforming barrages of synaptic inputs into spiking activity. Synaptic inhibition suppresses the output firing activity of a neuron, and is commonly classified as having a subtractive or divisive effect on a neuron's output firing activity. Subtractive inhibition can narrow the range of inputs that evoke spiking activity by eliminating responses to non-preferred inputs. Divisive inhibition is a form of gain control: it modifies firing rates while preserving the range of inputs that evoke firing activity. Since these two "modes" of inhibition have distinct impacts on neural coding, it is important to understand the biophysical mechanisms that distinguish these response profiles. We use simulations and mathematical analysis of a neuron model to find the specific conditions for which inhibitory inputs have subtractive or divisive effects. We identify a novel role for the A-type Potassium current (IA). In our model, this fast-activating, slowly- inactivating outward current acts as a switch between subtractive and divisive inhibition. If IA is strong (large maximal conductance) and fast (activates on a time-scale similar to spike initiation), then inhibition has a subtractive effect on neural firing. In contrast, if IA is weak or insufficiently fast-activating, then inhibition has a divisive effect on neural firing. We explain these findings using dynamical systems methods to define how a spike threshold condition depends on synaptic inputs and IA. Our findings suggest that neurons can "self-regulate" the gain control effects of inhibition via combinations of synaptic plasticity and/or modulation of the conductance and kinetics of A-type Potassium channels. This novel role for IA would add flexibility to neurons and networks, and may relate to recent observations of divisive inhibitory effects on neurons in the nucleus of the solitary tract.Comment: 20 pages, 11 figure