Features
Swearing Behind: Overcoming Asserted Prior Art in PTAB Proceedings
Part One of a Two-Part ArticleThis two-part article discusses the various legal and evidentiary requirements for antedating and removing prior art that patent owners should consider when their pre-AIA patents are challenged based on a prior art publication or activity that is not otherwise subject to a statutory bar. It also addresses considerations for petitioners to consider when developing their initial and ongoing invalidity strategies. Part One leads off with a discussion of the evidentiary requirements for proving earlier invention, conception and diligence and actual reduction in practice.
Features
Patent Strategy Tips from Fed. Circ. 'Kroy v. Groupon' Ruling on Collateral Estoppel
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently addressed the usage of the doctrine of collateral estoppel in patent infringement cases. Specifically, the court considered whether a finding of invalidity of claims by the PTAB at an inter partes review could be used to estop a patent holder from asserting patent infringement of different claims of the same patent in district court litigation.
Features
Post-Amgen Patent Playbook: Section 112 Under the Microscope
The Supreme Court’s unanimous 2023 decision in Amgen v. Sanofi reshaped enablement analysis for broad genus patent claims. In the wake of Amgen, broad functional claims have been scrutinized rigorously for sufficient disclosure. This article summarizes key post-Amgen decisions, which illustrate how patent drafters and litigators must navigate the fine line between claim breadth and disclosure depth in the post-Amgen era.
Features
ChatGPT’s Ghibli-Style Images Are Testing Copyright Law
Last month, a flood of whimsical, dreamlike portraits in the style of Studio Ghibli (the Japanese animation studio) swept across social media. What began as a playful social trend quickly raised legal concerns. Within days, users began reporting that OpenAI had restricted prompts referencing specific artistic styles. This trend offers a live case study of how generative AI may implicate core doctrines of copyright law, including derivative works, substantial similarity, and fair use.
Columns & Departments
IP News
Federal Circuit Examines Written Description Requirements for U.S. Patent Application Publications Used as Prior Art Under Pre-AIAFederal Circuit Denies Preliminary Injunction In a Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act Case
Features
D.C. Circuit Court Rules That Artificial Intelligence Cannot Solely Author Copyrightable Works
The D.C. Circuit affirmed that AI cannot be the sole author on a copyright-registered work, but left questions about the future of AI authorship in copyright for Congress to resolve.
Features
Writing Strong Antibody Claims: Avoiding or Addressing USPTO Rejections for Written Description and Enablement
Many patent applicants currently face difficulty in obtaining antibody claims because of written description and enablement rejections under 35 U.S.C. §112(a). The USPTO routinely rejects claims as too broad, arguing that such claims cover more antibodies than the specification discloses, or that undue experimentation would be needed to determine whether an antibody reads on the claims. These heightened disclosure requirements increase laboratory costs to generate sufficient data for a §112(a)-proof specification.
Features
Reframing the AI Debate Will Improve How We Practice Law
For the last several years, I’ve become obsessed with a particular legal, technological, and philosophical question: Can a robot invent on its own?
Features
New Bifurcated PTAB Pretrial Procedure: Procedural Deep Dive and Possible Implications
In the latest action part of a recent whirlwind of PTAB policy and procedural change around the use of so-called “discretionary denial” to refuse to a challenge to the validity of a granted patent, the Acting Director of the USPTO has issued a memorandum creating a new “bifurcated” pretrial procedure to be used for deciding whether or not to proceed with a trial in response to a petition for inter partes review or post grant review of a granted patent.
Features
The AI Litigation Battleground: Existing IP Legal Frameworks Create Uncertain Environment
As artificial intelligence continues to drive innovation at an unprecedented pace, it has also become a battleground for litigation, particularly concerning intellectual property misappropriation, data scraping and model transparency.
Need Help?
- Prefer an IP authenticated environment? Request a transition or call 800-756-8993.
- Need other assistance? email Customer Service or call 1-877-256-2472.
MOST POPULAR STORIES
- Understanding the Potential Pitfalls Arising From Participation in Standards BodiesChances are that if your company is involved in research and development of new technology there is a standards setting organization exploring the potential standardization of such technology. While there are clear benefits to participation in standards organizations — keeping abreast of industry developments, targeting product development toward standard compliant products, steering research and intellectual property protection into potential areas of future standardization — such participation does not come without certain risks. Whether you are in-house counsel or outside counsel, you may be called upon to advise participants in standard-setting bodies about intellectual property issues or to participate yourself. You may also be asked to review patent policy of the standard-setting body that sets forth the disclosure and notification requirements with respect to patents for that organization. Here are some potential patent pitfalls that can catch the unwary off-guard.Read More ›
- Use of Deferred Prosecution Agreements In White Collar InvestigationsThis article discusses the practical and policy reasons for the use of DPAs and NPAs in white-collar criminal investigations, and considers the NDAA's new reporting provision and its relationship with other efforts to enhance transparency in DOJ decision-making.Read More ›
- The DOJ's Corporate Enforcement Policy: One Year LaterThe DOJ's Criminal Division issued three declinations since the issuance of the revised CEP a year ago. Review of these cases gives insight into DOJ's implementation of the new policy in practice.Read More ›
- The DOJ's New Parameters for Evaluating Corporate Compliance ProgramsThe parameters set forth in the DOJ's memorandum have implications not only for the government's evaluation of compliance programs in the context of criminal charging decisions, but also for how defense counsel structure their conference-room advocacy seeking declinations or lesser sanctions in both criminal and civil investigations.Read More ›
- A Lawyer's System for Active ReadingActive reading comprises many daily tasks lawyers engage in, including highlighting, annotating, note taking, comparing and searching texts. It demands more than flipping or turning pages.Read More ›
