Over the past decade, thousands of patents have been granted for what are called business methods. Amazon.com received one for its “one-click” online payment system. Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy. One inventor patented a technique for lifting a box.

    Now the nation’s top patent court appears completely ready to scale back on business-method patents, which have been controversial ever since they were first authorized 10 years ago. In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents. In re Bilski, as the case is known, is “a very big deal”, says Dennis D. Crouch of the University of Missouri School of Law. It “has the potential to eliminate an entire class of patents.”

    Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face, because it was the Federal Circuit itself that introduced such patents with its 1998 decision in the so-called State Street Bank case, approving a patent on a way of pooling mutual-fund assets. That ruling produced an explosion in business-method patent filings, initially by emerging Internet companies trying to stake out exclusive rights to specific types of online transactions. Later, more established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might beat them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents, despite the fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment firms armed themselves with patents for financial products, even as they took positions in court cases opposing the practice.

    The Bilski case involves a claimed patent on a method for hedging risk in the energy market. The Federal Circuit issued an unusual order stating that the case would be heard by all 12 of the court’s judges, rather than a typical panel of three, and that one issue it wants to evaluate is whether it should “reconsider” its State Street Bank ruling.

    The Federal Circuit’s action comes in the wake of a series of recent decisions by the Supreme Court that has narrowed the scope of protections for patent holders. Last April, for example, the justices signaled that too many patents were being upheld for “inventions” that are obvious. The judges on the Federal Circuit are “reacting to the anti-patent trend at the Supreme Court”, says Harold C. Wegner, a patent attorney and professor at George Washington University Law School.

答案精析：根据题干中的Bilski case可定位至文章第二段第三句。根据定位句可知，比尔斯基案关系到商业方法专利是否会被废除，而一旦商业方法专利被废除，对此类案例的法律裁决也会改变，因此正确答案为D项。

错项排除：文章第二段提及，美国联邦巡回上诉法院声称会用一起特定的案例对商业方法专利进行广泛的复审。由此可知，法院尚未对此案件进行判决，因此A项和C项错误，故排除。文章第二段第三句提及a very big deal（一个大事件），此处指案件的影响非常大，但不能推断出是一宗非常大的商业交易，因此排除B项。

长难句分析：In a move that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said it would use a particular case to conduct a broad review of business-method patents.

本句的主语为the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit said…，句首的介词短语作状语，that has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz为定语从句，修饰a move。it would use…business-method patents为宾语从句，其中to conduct a broad review of business-method patents为目的状语。

句意为：美国联邦巡回上诉法院的一个提案引得知识产权律师们议论纷纷。在该提案中，美国联邦巡回上诉法院表示，它将借审理一个特殊的待审案件为契机，对商业方法专利进行广泛审查。