A tangible medium will not be read into claims that fail to recite or reference any such medium. Here, for example, a “universal speech-recognition interface” software application consisting of software instructions was found to not imply the existence of a machine readable, physical state in order to exist. “[I]nstructions, data, or information alone, absent a tangible medium, is not a manufacture.” It may therefore be best to ensure that all software-related claims other than method claims explicitly recite tangible hardware such as a tangible medium.
Background / Facts: The patent being asserted here is directed to a speech recognition product that allows users to store an audio recording of a dictation, replay the recording to correct the recognized text, and directly dictate into any application. In this regard, the claims recite “[a] universal speech-recognition interface” that the patentee explained as corresponding to the specification’s “interface applications,” thus being limited to software including “software instructions.”
Issue(s): Whether the claimed software is nevertheless patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because it must necessarily be in a machine readable, physical state in order to exist.
Holding(s): No. “Software may be patent eligible, but when a claim is not directed towards a process, the subject matter must exist in tangible form. … [A]s this Court has recognized, instructions, data, or information alone, absent a tangible medium, is not a manufacture. [] We decline to import or, as [the patentee] argues, ‘imply’ a tangible medium into claims that fail to recite or reference any such medium.”