11[A]compared    [B]shown    [C]subjected    [D]conveyed

　　12.[A]contrary to    [B]consistent with [C]parallel with  [D]pealliar to

　　13.[A]evidence    [B]guidance    [C]implication    [D]source

　　14.[A]disputable    [B]enlightening  [C]retiable    [D]wasleadmg

　　15.[A]In contast    [B]For example  [C]In consequence [D]As usual

　　16.[A]duly    [B]accidentally  [C]unpredictably  [D]suddenly

　　17.[A]failed    [B]ceased    [C]started    [D]continued

　　20.[A]breaking    [B]chrnbing    [C]surpassmg    [D]hiting

　　Section Ⅱ Reading Comprehension

　　Part A

　　Directions：

　　Read the following four texts.Answer the questions below each text by choosing[A]，[B]，[C]or[D].Mark your answers on ANSWER SHEET 1.(40 points)

　　Text 2

　　Over the past decade,thousands of patents have seen granled for what are called business methods.Amazon com received one for its“one-click”online payment

　　systern Merrill Lynch got legal protection for an asset allocation strategy.One invenlor patented a tochnique for lying a box

　　Now the nation’s top patent court appears completely ready to scale hack on business-method patents, which have been controversial e,ver since they were first

　　authorized 10 years ago In a movethat has intellectual-property lawyers abuzz the U.S court of Appeals for the federal ctrcuit sald it would usea particular case tO

　　conduct a broad review of business-method patents. Inre Bijskl, as the case is known, is“a very big deal”， says Dermis'D  Crouch of the University of Missoun

　　School of law.It “has the potential to elinate an entire class of patmts”

　　Curbs on business-method claims would be a dramatic about-face because it was the federal circuit itself that introduced such patents with is 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 pinhts to specific types of online transactions. Later, move established companies raced to add such patents to their files, if only as a defensive move against rivals that might bent them to the punch. In 2005, IBM noted in a court filing that it had been issued more than 300 business-method patents despite tha fact that it questioned the legal basis for granting them. Similarly, some Wall Street investment films 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 evaluste is wether it should “reconsider” its state street Bank ruling。