What will be interesting, in my opinion, is how they draw the distinction. They don't have to draw a distinction, of course. The last time a finance patent cam

What will be interesting, in my opinion, is how they draw the distinction. They don't have to draw a distinction, of course. The last time a finance patent came before the Supreme Court in Bilski in 2010, there were two theories about why the patent in suit wasn't valid under 35 USC §101. Four judges agreed with each theory, leaving only Justice Antonin Scalia to decide. Scalia joined with the conclusion of each side and the theory of neither, leaving the situation even more confused than before. Most likely the exact same thing will ensue this time.