(Podcast) The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
The Briefing: Thirsty for Clarity – Brand Confusion In The Beverage Category
SCOTUS and federal court rulings on TTAB decisions on granting trademarks and trademark renewals; Netflix settling an anticipated defamation case with a disclaimer and donation
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
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
Was the classic song “Over The Rainbow” plagiarized? How about a claim of copyright infringement against the script for “The Holdovers?” AI Legal strategies switch to claims of CMI removal
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions (Podcast)
4 Key Takeaways | Updates in Standard Essential Patent Licensing and Litigation
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Preview What’s Ahead in 2024
8 Key Takeaways | The Presumption of Irreparable Harm After the Trademark Modernization Act of 2020
(Podcast) The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
The Briefing: SCOTUS to Determine if USPTO Refusal to Register TRUMP TOO SMALL is Unconstitutional
USPTO Director Review — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Applications Including Criticisms of Known Living Figures
Podcast: The Briefing by the IP Law Blog - USPTO Suspends Action on Trademark Applications Targeting Names of Public Figures
The Briefing by the IP Law Blog: USPTO Suspends Action on Trademark Applications Targeting Names of Public Figures
Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Paralegal Insights: A Collaborative Trademark Practice Series 2
In Pfizer Inc., v. Sanofi Pasteur Inc., SK Chems Co. Ltd., v. Vidal, 2019-1871 (March 5, 2024), the Federal Circuit affirmed the Board’s conclusions that claims 1–45 of U.S. Patent No. 9,492,559 were unpatentable due to...more
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE IN LIFE SCIENCES - Life sciences companies are forming AI-driven strategic collaborations with tech giants, creating synergy that promises to revolutionize the industry. Companies like NVIDIA,...more
In Natera, Inc v. Neogenomics Laboratories, Inc., Appeal No. 24-1324 the Federal Circuit held that preliminary injunction may be valid if a substantial question of invalidity was not raised, even if the asserted patent is...more
The use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in practice before the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) is changing how practitioners prepare and submit documents. The USPTO’s recent Guidance on Use of...more
The explosion of artificial intelligence has raised some challenging questions in patent law, particularly with prior art, or the body of knowledge available prior to the filing of patent application. Two of the most...more
On April 3, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a notice of rulemaking setting out the fees that it proposes for the fiscal year starting on September 29, 2024. Although the proposed fees are...more
Naming a person who is not a proper inventor on your non-provisional patent application can be a costly, time-consuming error to fix, and if not fixed ultimately results in an invalid patent. Typically, time and money are two...more
On May 21, 2024, the Federal Circuit upended decades of precedent regarding design patents in its decision LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC. Sitting en banc, a panel of Federal Circuit judges overturned...more
Given their potential to revolutionize many aspects of legal practice and intellectual property, artificial intelligence (“AI”) tools have become a mainstay in the legal space. While AI has its benefits, it also carries...more
Those following this blog knew change was coming to design patent obviousness in the LKQ v. GM decision by the en banc Federal Circuit. In its May 21, 2024 decision, the court overruled the long-standing Rosen-Durling test...more
In the recent case of LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, the en banc (for the first time in five years) Federal Circuit overruled the long-established Rosen-Durling test used for evaluating the...more
Upending decades of continuity in the world of design patents, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (“CAFC”), sitting en banc in LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, overturned the...more
In a highly anticipated decision, the en banc Federal Circuit overruled the longstanding Rosen-Durling test for assessing obviousness of design patents. The challenged framework, derived from two cases, In re Rosen, 673 F.2d...more
LKQ Corporation v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, Appeal No. 2021-2348 (Fed. Cir. May 21, 2024) - In a rare en banc opinion, the Federal Circuit overruled decades of prior precedent concerning the standard to...more
On Tuesday, the en banc Federal Circuit released its highly anticipated decision in LKQ v. GM Global Technology Operations LLC, rejecting as “improperly rigid” the previous standard for evaluating whether a design patent is...more
In the mid-2000s, the U.S. Patent Office (USPTO) determined that reexaminations would be more consistent and legally correct if performed by a centralized set of experienced and specially trained Examiners. As a result, the...more
The USPTO published a request for comments (RFC) on April 30th, focusing on how advancements in artificial intelligence (AI) may impact the USPTO’s assessment of patentability governing (i) what may qualify as prior art and...more
Takeaways: -A requester can have a voice in ex parte reexamination prosecution. - Requesters should strategically structure their request documents to hedge against potential patent owner amendment and argument. The...more
Takeaways: - Patent owner requested reexaminations are not an admission of claim unpatentability. - Patent owners can and should control the reexamination request narrative. Patent owners must consider the pros and...more
On April 30, the USPTO announced a Request for Comments (RFC) seeking public feedback on how AI could affect USPTO evaluations on patentability, including what qualifies as prior art and the assessment of the level of...more
On April 30, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a Request for Comments (RFC) seeking stakeholder input on fifteen questions regarding artificial intelligence (AI) and its impact on (1) prior...more
One year ago, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) that set forth several ideas related to America Invents Act (AIA) proceedings before the Patent Trial...more
A significant procedure for patent owners, Supplemental Examination, was established in the 2012 America Invents Act when Congress determined there should be a proceeding to turn events that in the past could lead to...more
Addressing when a drawing in a prior art reference includes a teaching that is “clear on its face,” the Director of the US Patent & Trademark Office vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board decision denying...more
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