Sequenom’s patentable subject matter test introduced a rigid, atomistic approach to claims eligibility that would result in an unsound change to US patent policy, which has encouraged the global convergence of patent standards for over twenty years. The Sequenom 35 U.S.C. § 101 test conflicts with the holistic, harmonized European approach to excepted or excluded subject matter. As applied, it arguably contradicts international treaties to which the US is a party, and upon which the European Patent Convention’s patentability exceptions and exclusions are based. Global fragmentation of patent standards threatens efficiencies of scale and destabilizes those policies. This case supplies a compelling vehicle to clarify the patent eligibility tests enunciated in this Court’s recent case law since the patent claims’ scope were forensically construed in a Markman proceeding.