New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
John Harmon on the Evolving Impact of Artificial Intelligence on Intellectual Property
Rob Sahr on the Administration’s Aggressive Approach to Bayh-Dole Compliance
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
Noteworthy Points in the Rules for the Implementation of China's Patent Law 2023
5 Key Takeaways | Best Practices in Patent Drafting: Addressing 112 and Enablement after Amgen
Third Party Observation in Patent Prosecution in China
Building a Cost-Effective Global Patent Portfolio Using the Netherlands
Greater Speed and Efficiency: Steps IP Offices Around the World Are Taking to Streamline the Patent Process
Ways to Amend the Claims in the Patent Invalidation Proceedings
Estoppel Doctrine in China's Patent System
3 Key Takeaways | Third party Prior Art Submissions at USPTO
Patent Dual-application Strategy in China
Conflicting Application in China’s Patent System
New and Non-Obvious: The Nuts-and-Bolts Episode on Patent Law
5 Key Takeaways | Current Perspectives Around the Convergence of Life Sciences and IT
What You Should Know About Seeking Patent Protection in Vietnam
Every month, Erise’s patent attorneys review the latest inter partes review cases and news to bring you the stories that you should know about: Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB’s Analogous Art Finding - As IP Watchdog...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s decision to correct inventorship in a post-issuance inventorship dispute, finding that the alleged joint inventors’ contributions were significant...more
Addressing the same invention requirement for reissue patents, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision to reject an overly broad reissue application. In re Float‘N’Grill...more
SNIPR Technologies Limited v. Rockefeller University, Appeal No. 2022-1260 (Fed. Cir. July 14, 2023) Our case of the week addresses a wrinkle in the law concerning disputes between parties that filed patent applications...more
Dionex Softron GmbH v. Agilent Techs., Inc., Appeal No. 21-2372 (Fed. Cir. Jan. 6, 2023) - This week’s Case of the Week, the only precedential patent opinion issued by the Federal Circuit this week, focused primarily on...more
The Federal Circuit has ruled that only human beings – and not an artificial intelligence (AI) can be considered an “inventor” under US patent law. (We wrote about this issue way back in 2017, by the way…)... ...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Thaler v. Vidal, Appeal No. 2021-2347 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 5, 2022) - In its only precedential patent decision this week, the Federal Circuit answered a question that had long occupied the musings...more
On June 6, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held oral argument on the issue of whether an invention generated by artificial intelligence (AI) is patentable. The Patent Applications - As described in a...more
The PTAB Strategies and Insights newsletter provides timely updates and insights into how best to handle proceedings at the USPTO. It is designed to increase return on investment for all stakeholders looking at the entire...more
[co-author: Jamie Dohopolski] Last year, the continued global COVID-19 pandemic forced American courts to largely continue the procedures set in place in 2020. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit was no...more
Our previous blog posts, Artificial Intelligence as the Inventor of Life Sciences Patents? and Update on Artificial Intelligence: Court Rules that AI Cannot Qualify As “Inventor,” discuss recent inventorship issues...more
A recent decision of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit has fundamentally altered the law on prior art anticipation for design patent applications. In this decision, captioned In re: SurgiSil, L.L.P....more
We live at a time when Artificial Intelligence (AI) autonomously drives cars, carries on conversations with humans, and in many other ways engages in seemingly intelligent and increasingly even creative acts previously...more
Belcher Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Hospira, Inc., Appeal No. 2020-1799 (Fed. Cir. Sept. 1, 2021) - In an appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware, the Federal Circuit affirmed the district...more
On January 22, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 17-1229 (Jan. 22, 2019)....more
Addressing whether the on-sale bar of America Invents Act (AIA) 35 USC § 102(a)(1) applies to confidential sales where specific details are not made public, the Supreme Court of the United States found that the post-AIA...more
If the term "happy hour" in this article's title caught your attention, you may be disappointed by what comes next. This article is actually about limitations on patent protection, which I would argue is just as...more
Originally published in The Journal Record | January 31, 2019. This month, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, confirming that private sales of an invention may preclude...more
The Supreme Court recently issued its closely-watched decision in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., which has direct implications regarding the scope of § 102 prior art under the America Invents Act...more
Prior to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), the patent statute (35 U.S.C. § 102(b)) prohibited patenting an invention that was “on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for...more
Inventors should not delay the filing of their patent applications, and preferably should file within one year of any commercialization of the invention, as confirmed by the Supreme Court on January 22, 2019....more
In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Supreme Court interpreted the “on sale bar” of the America Invents Act (AIA) version of 35 U.S.C. § 102 as unchanged from the pre-AIA version. In so doing, the...more
In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc, the United States Supreme Court held that a prior public sale of a patented product could destroy the novelty of a patent for that product even though there was no...more
U.S. patent law states that any invention that was “on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent” is not eligible for patent protection. The Supreme Court recently confirmed...more
The America Invents Act (“AIA”), also called the Patent Reform Act of 2011, was enacted to overhaul the U.S. patent system and harmonize the domestic patent laws with those in the rest of the world. The AIA also created new...more