Sentence examples for transformation test from inspiring English sources

This means that the ability to respire using easily degradable carbon sources such as glucose (the principle of the carbon transformation test) is more widespread than the ability to transform ammonium to nitrite and nitrate.

3218, 177 L.Ed.2d 792, which clarified that the "machine or transformation test" is not a definitive test of patent eligibility, but only an important and useful clue.

Thus, the patents satisfied the Circuit's "machine or transformation test," which the court thought sufficient to "confine the patent monopoly within rather definite bounds," thereby bringing the claims into compliance with § 101.

We first review two (one-sided) noninferiority tests, namely the logarithmic transformation test and the Fieller-type test, and their associated sample size formulae proposed for matched-pair designs when the null hypothesis is of a specified nonunity rate ratio.

Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, who wrote the 16-page majority opinion, was joined by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. and Justices Clarence Thomas and Samuel A. Alito Jr. in saying that the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was wrong to declare in 2008 that the "machine or transformation" test was the only appropriate test for patenting a process.

According to the guidance listed above [1], the nitrogen transformation test is considered sufficient for most non-agrochemical substances.

Regardless, in stating that the "machine-or-transformation" test is an "important and useful clue" to patentability, we have neither said nor implied that the test trumps the "law of nature" exclusion.

The Court of Appeals ruled that the first mentioned of these, the so-called machine-or-transformation test, was the sole test to be used for determining the patentability of a "process" under the Patent Act, 35 U.S.C.

Failing on both counts, the inventors took their case to the Supreme Court, which has been pondering for the past few months whether the "machine-or-transformation" test is an appropriate standard.

"We are pleased," he continued, with the broader message of the case -- that business methods could be patented, and that process patents would not be limited to the machine-or-transformation test.

Relying heavily on 1970s-era Supreme Court decisions that established the "machine-or-transformation test," the Chief Judge, Paul Michel wrote for a nine-judge majority Thursday that Mr. Bilski's patent application did not meet an older definition of "process" under patent law.