The Clearing Association filed an amicus brief in CLS Bank International v. Alice Corp. In the original decision, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that computer-aided methods of avoiding settlement risk in financial transactions were patentable merely because it was not “manifestly evident” that claims were patent ineligible under Section 101, a ruling that is inconsistent with Supreme Court and Federal Circuit precedent.

The brief requests that the U.S. Court of Appeals put an end to the uncertainty around the scope and application of Section 101 of the Patent Act to patent applications involving computers but otherwise known mental processes. The brief outlines that Section 101 establishes an essential threshold requirement for patent eligibility and that the addition of a computer to an otherwise unpatentable mental process does not transform that process into something patentable unless the integration of the computer is essential to the execution of the process.