Hiroyuki Iwahashi , Yoshiki Nishioka , and Mitsuhiro Hakaridani applied for a patent for an autocorrelation unit for use in computers for pattern recognition, in this case to aid in voice recognition. To achieve this type of pattern recognition, computers must perform a lengthy multiplication cycle that requires intricate circuitry and a costly multiplier unit. The computer hardware i n volved in this process is also large and cumbersome. The purpose of the new invention is to streamline the multiplication cycle. The elimination of the multiplier and the intricate circuitry is made possible by an algorithm that allows the computer to obtain the needed result by detouring the time-consuming multiplication cycle and using instead the electronic equivalent of a multiplication table. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office rejected the patent application, and the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences upheld that decision.

Both concluded that the alleged invention was nothing more than an algorithm and could not therefore be patented. The inventors a p pealed the decision, arguing that the algorithm is simply part of the apparatus, which altered the operation of the computer and was therefore subject to patentability. Can a patent be rejected solely on the argument that the invention involves an algorithm? Explain. In re Iwahashi , 888 F.2d 1370 (Fed. Cir.).