Since the Supreme Court decided Alice v. CLS Bank in
June 2014, the USPTO regularly issued new memoranda explaining its
implementation of the § 101 framework. This includes some
of the more notable memos for prosecutors: the memo on Enfish
v. Microsoft from May 2016, the memo on McRO and
BASCOM from November 2016, and dozens of eligibility
examples. Much of that guidance is incorporated into the MPEP.
While the guidance does not have the force of law, patent examiners
are expected to follow it.
On October 17, 2019, the USPTO issued new guidance - 22 pages
worth - on § 101. While it covers fewer topics than past
guidance, it goes into more detail on Step 2A - providing
clarifications, reiterating certain concepts, and introducing a new
procedure for abstract ideas falling outside of the enumerated
groups in the January 2019 guidance (
New Year, New Section 101 Guidance: Welcome 2019!). There
are also new examples (
USPTO's 101 site).