The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the claims of U.S. Pat. No. 6,993,049 are not directed to patent ineligible subject matter and thus reversed and remanded the district court's decision. The Federal Circuit stated that "[w]e have routinely held software claims patent eligible under Alice step one when they are directed to improvements to the functionality of a computer or network platform itself" and held that "the claims at issue are directed to a patent

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the claims drawn to a device that more accurately distinguishes atrial fibrillation and atrial flutter from other types of arrythmias are directed to patent eligible improvement under 35 U.S.C. § 101. The Federal Circuit stated that the claimed invention achieves multiple technological improvements by identifying “variability in the beat-to-beat timing . . . as relevant to the at least one of atrial fibrillation and atria

The Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the 35 U.S.C. § 101 rejection of Mr. Rudy's claims relating to a method of fishing which recites observing water clarity, measuring light transmittance and selecting a fishing hook based on a chart in the claims. The Federal Circuit emphasized that "we apply our law and the relevant Supreme Court precedent, not the Office Guidance, when analyzing subject matter eligibility. To the extent the Office Guidance contradicts or