5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
5 Key Takeaways | Hot Topics in Biopharma
Podcast: The Briefing - A Prototypical Corporate Salesperson is Not Patentable
[IP Hot Topics Podcast] Innovation Conversations: Andrei Iancu
Nota Bene Episode 99: Unpacking the Pendulum of American Patent Policy Then, Now, and Forward with Rob Masters
IP(DC) Podcast: Patent Battles – New Patent Initiatives on the Hill & Notable CAFC/SCOTUS Decisions
Podcast: Patentable Subject Matter in 2019
Compiling Successful IP Solutions for Software Developers
Drafting Software Patents In A Post-Alice World
On September 17, 2024, Judges Taranto, Chen and Cunningham of the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) upheld the invalidation of a patent belonging to Angel Technologies Group, LLC and dismissed...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit admonished the U.S. District Court for the District of Delaware on Wednesday for abuse of its discretion in finding the disputed claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101, “a...more
On September 9, 2024, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”) reversed the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California’s decision finding asserted claims invalid under 35 U.S.C. §...more
On September 9, the Federal Circuit reversed a Northern District of California decision that invalidated two video camera patents as being directed to patent-ineligible abstract ideas under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Contour IP...more
Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - WISCONSIN ALUMNI RESEARCH FOUNDATION v. APPLE INC. [OPINION] (2022-1884, 8/28/2024) (Prost, Taranto, and Chen) - Prost, J. The Court affirmed two final judgments of the...more
It's been a while since I last posted, and I apologize for that. (If interested, here's an alert about what's kept me away: a CFAA trial we wrapped up in late July.) But I am back, so let's look at the latest on the Section...more
Under the direction of President Biden’s executive order on artificial intelligence (AI), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a guidance update on the subject matter eligibility analysis “to promote...more
Our Texas Patent Litigation Monthly Wrap-Up for July 2024 covers three decisions of interest from the Eastern District of Texas granting motions related to subject matter eligibility, stays pending inter partes review (IPR),...more
On appeal from a motion to dismiss based on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that a district court appropriately analyzed certain claims as representative claims and that the...more
Koss filed a patent infringement suit against Bose asserting the ’155, ’934, and ’025 patents, after which Bose petitioned for inter partes review of all three patents before the PTAB. The district court case was stayed...more
Mobile Acuity Ltd. v. Blippar Ltd., Appeal No. 2022-2216 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 6, 2024) In its only precedential patent opinion last week, the Federal Circuit confirmed the invalidity of all claims of two asserted patents as...more
The US Patent Office (USPTO) recently issued new guidance and three examples for AI-related patent claims, which indicate that claims applying AI to a process are unlikely to render the process patent-eligible at the USPTO...more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued new guidance on patent subject matter eligibility, specifically concerning AI inventions. This guidance aims to assist patent examiners in assessing whether claims in a...more
On July 17th, the USPTO issued a guidance update to help USPTO personnel and those who interact with the agency evaluate the subject matter eligibility of claims in patent applications involving artificial intelligence (AI)....more
On July 16, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) announced new guidance for examination of patent applications directed to critical and emerging technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI)....more
On cross-appeals from a granted Fed. R. of Civ. Pro. 12(c) motion on subject matter eligibility, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that a patent directed to a method for “assist[ing] an investigator in...more
In accordance with President Biden’s Executive Order on the use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in October 2023, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued new subject matter eligibility guidance relating to AI...more
On July 16, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released updated guidance on patent subject matter eligibility, focusing on artificial intelligence (AI). This update, effective from July 17, 2024, is...more
On July 17, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published guidance regarding the patent subject matter eligibility of claims concerning technology applicable to artificial intelligence (AI)....more
In a July 16 press release, The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced that it issued a guidance update on “patent subject matter eligibility to address innovation in critical emerging technologies including...more
As required by President Joe Biden’s Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued the Guidance on Patent...more
On July 16, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued new guidance on the patentability of AI-related inventions. Although the USPTO emphasized that its guidance does not change the law of 35 U.S.C....more
On July 17, the USPTO published an update to the patent eligibility guidance and added three new examples to aid practitioners and examiners in determining whether a claimed invention is eligible subject matter under Section...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit applied the Alice/Mayo framework to assess whether claims directed to remote gambling were patent eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and determined that the claims were directed to...more
From the U.S. Supreme Court’s perspective, its Mayo and Alice decisions from 2012 and 2014, respectively, are still sufficient to govern patent law’s § 101 analysis. This inference stems in-part of the Supreme Court’s cert...more