The USPTO issued a memorandum on Aug 2, 2025 to help examiners assess subject matter eligibility in software-related inventions, especially those involving AI and machine learning. The memo does not change existing rules but reinforces current guidance in the MPEP and the 2024 AI Subject Matter Eligibility Update.
Key points:
- Step 2A Prong One: Examiners must determine if claims recite a judicial exception (abstract ideas, laws of nature, or natural phenomena). Special focus is given to the mental process category, stressing that only processes that can practically be performed by the human mind count as abstract ideas. Claims that merely “involve” but do not “recite” such exceptions remain eligible. (Check the end of this article if you want help understanding between involving and reciting)
- Step 2A Prong Two: If a judicial exception is recited, examiners must evaluate whether the claim as a whole integrates it into a practical application. This includes checking if it improves computer functioning or another technical field, rather than just telling a computer to “apply it.”
- Examiners should avoid oversimplifying claims and only issue 101 rejections when ineligibility is more likely than not. (101 rejections cover subject matter that the law doesn’t allow patents on, like ideas that are too abstract or laws of nature, for example)
- A complete examination must address all statutory requirements (101, 102, 103, 112) in the first Office action.
- The USPTO provides training and examples (including AI-focused ones) to guide eligibility analysis.
In short: the memo emphasizes careful distinction between abstract ideas and true technological improvements.
Here is a link to the full article:
https://www.uspto.gov/sites/default/files/documents/memo-101-20250804.pdf
PS: These memos are guidelines, not mandates.
Recite v involve
So, for a really basic example using a GPS navigation: a claim that says “Determine the shortest path using Dijkstra’s algorithm”, directly recites the algorithm (an abstract idea).
A claim that says “Provide turn-by-turn navigation on a mobile device” involves math and algorithms, but it doesn’t claim the algorithm itself.