The Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (PERA) proposes a solution to a complex debate: What can be patented, and when do nature and thoughts become property? This article provides an overview of the PERA bill, examines the current issues with Section 101 of the Patent Act, the specific proposals of PERA, and the existing pros and cons of the bill.
The U.S. patent legal landscape in 2025 is poised for change. The incoming presidential administration is coupled with interim changes in leadership at the USPTO after Kathi Vidal’s departure, and several newly vacant, fillable commissioner seat openings at the ITC. Amid that backdrop, many pieces of proposed patent legislation are pending in Congress which could further — or possibly stifle — modern trends in American patent law, and could alter our innovation landscape for years to come. This article surveys that pending patent legislation.
How do you determine if ongoing royalty obligations that extend beyond the life of underlying patent protection, even if agreed to by the contracting parties, are enforceable? A recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit shows what types of license arrangements pass the test.
The LJN Quarterly Update highlights some of the articles from the nine LJN Newsletters titles over the quarter. Articles include in-depth analysis and insights from lawyers and other practice area experts.
On August 13, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential ruling that reversed the District of Delaware's application of the Federal Circuit precedent in In re: Cellect to invalidate a claim in an earlier-filed parent application over admittedly patentably indistinct claims in later-filed (and earlier-expired) child patents. This decision has resolved some substantial questions about the application of obviousness-type double patenting that had been raised by last year's In re Cellect decision.
Federal Circuit: Affirms Preliminary Injunction on Cancer Assays Federal Circuit: Affirms Judgment of Unpatentability on the Pleadings for Claims Directed to Method of Assisting an Investigator in Conducting a Background Investigation
In an eagerly anticipated decision involving the proper standard for assessing when a claimed design is obvious, the Federal Circuit overruled the Rosen-Durling test that courts and the USPTO have been applying for nearly 30 years, calling the test "improperly rigid" and inconsistent with Supreme Court precedent.
The Act is intended to guard against patent trolling and creates a private cause of action for those targeted by bad faith infringement assertions and contemplates two types of relief: remedies and a bond requirement.
When is an inventor not an inventor? It's when the inventor isn't human. So, if a non-human inventor can't, in the eyes of patent law, be an inventor, what role can the non-human inventor have in the patent system? The answer is straightforward. Even though it can't create, it can destroy.
While it may be growing more difficult to protect business information with the FTC's noncompete ban, patents can provide strong protection over technical innovations, regardless of whether the inventor stays with the company or leaves.
