Should the U.S. Supreme Court Provide Dicta About Computer-Based Business Methods in the Bilski Opinion?
If the U.S. Supreme Court issues an opinion in Bilski that discusses the “machine” tests of patentability, those statements would be dicta. Dicta are “expressions in [a] court’s opinion which go beyond the facts before [the] court and “do not embody the resolution or determination of the [case].”12 Courts have stated that dicta merely represent the “individual views of author[s] of the [judicial] opinion and [are] not binding in subsequent cases.”13 Courts often restrict their analysis to the specific facts presented by the case at hand, and treat other considerations as moot, for a variety of reasons. The parties may not have adequately briefed the court on such topics, and other parties with a direct interest in such issues may not have presented their views to the court. Whether the U.S. Supreme Court should adhere to these truisms in Bilski can be vociferously debated. Dissenting justices at the Federal Circuit pointed out that it is absolutely crucial that the courts provide direc
