and particularly claim the invention. Sections 102 and 103 ensure that the public is free to use what was previously known and the obvious variants thereof. The Section 101 eligibility inquiry determines whether a claim is limited meaningfully to permissible subject matter, as distinct from the validity requirements of the other sections. The Supreme Court repeatedly has cautioned against conflating the analysis of the conditions of patentability in the Patent Act with inquiries into patent eligibility. See Diehr, 450 U.S. at 190, 101 S.Ct. 1048 (“The question therefore of whether a particular invention is novel is wholly apart from whether the invention falls into a category of statutory subject matter.” (internal quotation marks omitted)); see also Prometheus, 132 S.Ct. at 1304 (<HOLDING>). Because a new combination of old steps is
recognizing that the  101 inquiry and other patentability inquiries might sometimes overlap but that shifting the patenteligibility inquiry entirely to these other sections risks creating significantly greater legal uncertainty while assuming that those sections can do work that they are not equipped to do recognizing that to shift the patenteligibility inquiry entirely to  102 103 and 112 risks creating significantly greater legal uncertainty while assuming that those sections can do work that they are not equipped to do holding that neglect was not excusable where the defendants did not do all that they were required to do after they received the summons and complaint in that they did not contact a lawyer or make any other arrangements with respect to their defense recognizing the need to avoid creating legal disincentives for schools to do all they can to engage parents in their childrens educations holding that while the parties may choose to renegotiate their agreement they are under no good faith obligation to do so