Each decision involves reversal of a prior art rejection and contrasts with the other decisions on subject matter eligibility, revealing different PTAB approaches and results that can inform prosecution and appeal strategies.
The future of antibody claiming in the United States is uncertain following the U.S. Supreme Court's May 2023 ruling in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, a highly anticipated decision concerning enablement and whether the traditional way to claim antibodies — claiming antibodies by their function — will survive as a valid claiming strategy.
Part Two of a Two-Part article While the last decade has seen a dramatic increase in the number of AI patents, such patents face difficulty in overcoming the patent-eligibility challenges under §101 and Alice. Section 101, however, is not the only hurdles AI patents must overcome. Section 112, with its written description, enablement, and definiteness requirements, presents additional obstacles.
Part One of a Two-Part Article Under the current Alice framework, those attempting to patent AI innovations face an uphill battle. But, as the caselaw demonstrates, inventors and patent drafters can take steps to reduce the risk of AI patent claims being invalidated as abstract ideas.
Perhaps the largest impact that Director Vidal has had upon the PTAB is has been via Director Reviews. The U.S. Supreme Court mandated Director Reviews to correct procedural defects in the way that administrative patent judges are appointed to the PTAB.
Part Two of a Two-Part Article In Part One, we discussed the IBM v. Zillow case, where IBM sued Zillow for infringing on seven IBM's patents directed to artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for estimating property value. The focus was on the difficulties in establishing patent infringement on specific AI algorithms, as well as the strategic advantages of including additional patent claims that target ancillary features of an AI system. In this segment, we will analyze the claims made in the IBM v. Zillow case and present some tips for drafting AI-related claims from the perspective of patent infringement.
Part One of a Two-Part Article This two-part article sheds light on several important aspects of patents on AI technology. In Part One, we provide a general overview of the IBM v. Zillow lawsuit and discusses strategies to diversify patent portfolios to maximize protection on AI-related technology.
Takeaways from 'IBM v. Zillow' from a Patent Drafting Perspective Part Two of a Two-Part Article In Part One of this article we discussed the IBM v. Zillow case, where IBM sued Zillow for infringing on seven IBM's patents directed to artificial intelligence (AI) algorithms for estimating property value. The focus was on the difficulties in establishing patent infringement on specific AI algorithms, as well as the strategic advantages of including additional patent claims that target ancillary features of an AI system. In this segment, we analyze the claims made in the Zillow case and present some tips for drafting AI-related claims from the perspective of patent infringement.
Federal Circuit Examines the Analogous Art Test Federal Circuit Affirms PTAB's Finding of Prior Invention
Efforts to diversify the inventive population will not only foster innovation across a wide range of businesses and industries but will also help greatly expand the pool of inventors across racial, gender and ethnic categories, and the country as a whole will realize numerous benefits.
