PATENTS - Alice v. CLS

Penultimate paragraph from petitioner/patentee's brief:

While some commentators may clamor for further limits on the nature of inventions eligible for patent protection, that is a job for Congress—not the courts. Congress has, where it deemed necessary, addressed perceived problems with patents on particular technologies. See, e.g., 42 U.S.C. § 2181(a) (nuclear weapons); 35 U.S.C. § 287(c) (medical activities); Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, Pub. L. No. 112- 29, §18, 125 Stat 284, 329-30 (2010) (business methods). If Congress deems it necessary to create specific rules for computer-implemented inventions, it can do so. The courts, in contrast, are neither constitutionally empowered, nor institutionally equipped, to conduct the sorts of inquiries needed to set national economic and industrial policy. See i4i, 131 S. Ct. at 2252; see also Pavelic & LeFlore v. Marvel Entm’t Grp., 493 U.S. 120, 126 (1989) (“Our task is to apply the text, not to improve upon it.”).