The Journey of Litigation
Quick Guide to Administrative Hearings
Wire Fraud Litigants Beware: Fourth Circuit Ruling Protects the Banks — The Consumer Finance Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: The Tale of Two Washingtons — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
How confidential is a request to access or challenge information in INTERPOL’s files?
Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
The Presumption of Innocence Podcast: Episode 64 - Cages We Built: The Making of Mass Incarceration in America
Solicitors General Insights: The Legal Frontlines in Iowa and Indiana — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
The Briefing: The Ninth Circuit Puts the Brakes on Eleanor’s Copyright Claim
The Briefing: No CTRL-ALT-DEL For the Server Test
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
Solicitors General Insights: A Deep Dive With Mississippi and Tennessee Solicitors General — Regulatory Oversight Podcast
Update on the State of Non-compete Restrictions (LaborSpeak)
UPIC Audits
Consumer Finance Monitor Podcast Episode: Prominent Journalist, David Dayen, Describes his Reporting on the Efforts of Trump 2.0 to Curb CFPB
#WorkforceWednesday®: Federal Contractors Alert - DEI Restrictions Reinstated by Appeals Court - Employment Law This Week®
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Exploring Procedural Justice | Judge Steve Leben | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Handling Post-Conviction Death Penalty Cases Pro Bono | McKenzie Edwards | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
Inside the Fourth Court of Appeals’ Clerk’s Office | Michael Cruz | Texas Appellate Law Podcast
In April, the Federal Circuit issued a significant patent law ruling involving artificial intelligence. In Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp, the Court addressed a core question facing many AI-driven businesses: When are...more
On April 18, 2025, the Federal Circuit issued an opinion in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp. addressing for the first time whether patents that claim no more than the application of generic machine learning to a new...more
Answering a much-anticipated question of first impression, the Federal Circuit affirmed an Eastern District of Pennsylvania decision that invalidated machine learning-related patent claims as ineligible subject matter under...more
On Friday, April 18, 2025, the Federal Circuit addressed a question of first impression regarding the validity of certain machine-learning patents under Section 101 in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., et al.,...more
In one of the first cases from the Federal Circuit addressing patent eligibility for machine-learning (ML) inventions, the court ruled that applying “generic” ML techniques to a new data environment to automate a task...more
Recentive Analytics, Inc., v. Fox Corp., Appeal No. 2023-2437 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 18, 2025) In our Case of the Week, the Federal Circuit addressed a question of first impression concerning whether developments in machine...more
In a significant decision, the United States Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently ruled that the Copyright Act of 1976 requires human authorship to register a work, affirming the district court’s denial of a...more
The recent decision in Thaler v. Perlmutter et al., No. 23-5233 (D.C. Cir. 2025) offers continued guidance on whether “authorship” can be attributed to AI systems (i.e., non-humans) under Copyright Law. The D.C. Circuit...more
Last week, the D.C. Circuit upheld the Copyright Office’s refusal to register the copyright in this image, which was created entirely by AI. This is consistent with longstanding precedent (in the US, at least) that only...more
Last week, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals issued its opinion in Thaler v. Perlmutter. The opinion notably solidifies the U.S. Copyright Office’s position that works generated autonomously (and thus solely) by artificial...more
On March 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the “D.C. Circuit”) ruled in Thaler v. Perlmutter, affirming that works created solely by artificial intelligence (“AI”) cannot be...more
The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia upheld a district court ruling that affirmed the US Copyright Office’s (CO) denial of a copyright application for artwork created by artificial intelligence (AI),...more
AT A GLANCE - On March 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit affirmed decisions by a lower court and the United States Copyright Office that human authorship is required to...more
On March 18, 2025, the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed the D.C. District Court’s and U.S. Copyright Office’s decisions, holding that a copyrighted work cannot be authored exclusively by an AI system. Computer...more
On February 13, 2025, Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) overturned a patent eligibility rejection of claims directed to a method of performing a computation using a quantum...more
The rapid rise of artificial intelligence (AI) has opened up exciting possibilities for innovation, but also uncertainty around who gets credit for inventions developed with the assistance of an AI system. At its core, there...more
The Federal Circuit held that patent claims directed to storing and providing medical images over the web as “virtual views” were invalid under 35 U.S.C. § 101 because they involved nothing more than “converting data and...more
Not surprisingly, 2023 was another notable year for design rights around the globe. However, nowhere more than the U.S. did we see court decisions that will, in the case of one, and could in the case of another, have...more
We are excited to share Sheppard Mullin’s inaugural quarterly report on key Federal Circuit decisions. The Spring 2023 Quarterly Report provides summaries of most key patent law-related decisions from January 1, 2023 to March...more
Our previous blog posts, Artificial Intelligence as the Inventor of Life Sciences Patents? and Update on Artificial Intelligence: Court Rules that AI Cannot Qualify As “Inventor,” discuss recent inventorship issues...more
SIPCO, LLC v. EMERSON ELECTRIC CO. Before O’Malley, Reyna, and Chen. Appeal from the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. Reyna concurring-in-part and dissenting-in-part Summary: The language “unobvious over the prior art” in...more
In Bayer v. Watson, the panel throws out Bayer’s patent to its Staxyn erectile dysfunction drug as being obvious, noting that the district court focused too heavily on the commercial availability of the prior art. The panel...more