physical aspect requirement. Canada A business method must be more than an abstract idea or theorem, otherwise it is not patentable in Canada. In order to be patentable, the business method must have a practical application. However, a business method that is an abstract idea does not become patentable merely because it has a practical application. For example, a particular business method that is an abstract idea does not become patentable merely because it is programmed into a computer as an algorithm. For a business method to be patentable, the algorithm cannot be the whole invention, but only one aspect of a novel combination. See Amazon.com, Inc. v The Attorney General of Canada, 2011 FCA 328, November 24, 2011 China In April 2017, SIPO (i.e. the Chinese patent office) revised its patent examination guidelines to allow the patenting of business methods provided the method had technical features. Brazil According to Brazilian Patent Law 9279, "commercial, accounting, financial, educational, advertising, raffling, and inspection schemes, plans, principles or methods" are not considered to be inventions or Utility Models. European Patent Convention Under the European Patent Convention (EPC), "[s]chemes, rules and methods for (...) doing business" are not regarded as inventions and are not patentable, "to the extent that a European patent application or European patent relates to such subject-matter or activities as such". However, "[i]f the claimed subject-matter specifies technical means, such as computers, computer networks or other programmable apparatus, for executing at least some steps of a business method, it is not limited to excluded subject-matter as such and thus not excluded from patentability under Art. 52(2)(c) and (3)." In such a case, the claimed subject-matter is considered to be of a technical nature and is not barred from patentability under . It is then assessed, as a second step, whether the invention involves an inventive step, considering that the "features which do not contribute to the technical character of the invention cannot support the presence of an inventive step (T 641/00)". India Per Chapter II, Section 3, part (k) of the Indian Patent Act, business methods are not patentable per se. However they are patentable if a new method solves a "technical" problem and an apparatus/system is involved. United States Current US case law Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International (decided June 2014) requires that in order for a business method to be patentable, it must be "significantly more" than