Search

Subject matter eligibility, a foundational doctrine of U.S. patent law, defines the types of inventions that are eligible for patent protection. 35 U.S.C § 101, the statutory basis for subject matter eligibility, notes four distinct categories of inventions that are eligible: processes, machines, manufactures, and compositions of matter. However, these categories are constrained by three judicial exceptions: (1) abstract ideas, (2) laws of nature, and (3) natural phenomena. These exceptions are meant to prevent inventors from patenting the basic building blocks of scientific progress. The judiciary has attempted to mark the boundaries of these exceptions through case law since the earliest days of the American patent system. However, as technology has advanced, it has become increasingly difficult to determine whether an invention invokes one of the judicial exceptions. Four Supreme Court cases, decided between 2010 and 2014, outlined the exceptions and culminated in the Mayo/Alice test: a two-pronged approach clarifying the doctrine of subject matter eligibility. Recently, in the case of American Axle v. Neapco Holdings, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit created uncertainty surrounding the Mayo/Alice test by invalidating a patent claim for a vibration-dampening liner. The court's ruling that a tangible product can implicitly invoke a law of nature could have wide-reaching implications for the doctrine of subject matter eligibility. This Comment explores the history and current state of the subject matter eligibility doctrine in the U.S. patent system. It further discusses the implications of the American Axle decision and its potential impact on the judicial exceptions. Finally, this Comment examines the American Axle decision's potential impact on the chemical and materials industries and seeks to provide guidance to practitioners in these fields regarding what they might expect moving forward. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effective use of the van der Waals 2D materials relies on their successful transfer from the growth substrate onto other target substrates in the form of large films or flakes. In particular, it is important to transfer such atomically thin samples to various substrates with minimal sample damage and exposure to etchants and chemicals to realize their applications. Here we develop a universal transfer method that not only is free of reactive etchants, but also can maintain the film morphology intact with no tears and cracks. We show a variety of different 2D crystals and thin films with various sizes and thicknesses transferred from different substrates, i.e. metal-organic chemical vapor deposition-grown WSe 2 coalesced thin films on sapphire and mechanically exfoliated 2D crystalline flakes on titanium nitride. Further examination by transmission electron microscopy indicates successful transfer of all the samples. This study presents a universal and etchant-free transfer method that can be used to transfer a variety of 2D crystals and other nanostructures from/to various substrates.