Understanding the Impact of IPR Estoppel and PTAB Discretionary Denials — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Making Sense of §102 Public Use and On Sale Bars to Patentability
Unexpected Paths to IP Law with Dan Young and Colin White
How IP Can Fuel Your Startup's Growth
Navigating PTAB’s New Approach to IPR and PGR Discretionary Denial - Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | AI and Your Patent Management, Strategy & Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Hilary Preston, Vice Chair at Vinson & Elkins, Discusses Energy Innovation: Protecting Your Intellectual Property Portfolio
What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 1) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
(Podcast) The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
The Briefing: 2025 IP Resolutions Start With a Review of IP Assets
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
(Podcast) The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
The Briefing: A Very Patented Christmas – The Quirkiest Inventions for the Holiday Season
A Conversation with Phil Hamzik
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - IP and M&A Transactions
4 Tips for Protecting Your AI Products
Whether AI can be an “inventor” was the key issue in an important recent ruling of the Canadian Patent Appeal Board (the “PAB”). In Thaler, Stephen L. (Re), 2025 CACP 8, the PAB had to decide whether Canadian Patent...more
The Federal Circuit determined that if a company misleads consumers about the nature of a product by making false patent marking claims, it can be held liable under the Lanham Act. False marking claims under the Lanham Act...more
Recently, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released proposed guidelines addressing the complex issue of AI inventorship. The PTO is not the only agency attempting to tackle this issue; jurisdictions...more
Pursuant to efforts by the federal government to develop artificial intelligence in a safe, secure and trustworthy manner, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued inventorship guidance for inventions developed with...more
The USPTO published its new “Inventorship Guidance for AI-assisted Inventions” on the Federal Register on February 13, 2024. This new guidance was in part a response to the Federal Circuit’s Thaler decision, which ruled that...more
As directed by President Biden’s Executive Order (EO) on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence (the AI EO), the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released its...more
The Background: In response to the Biden administration's "Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence" on October 30, 2023, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office...more
On February 12, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) issued guidance on the patentability of inventions developed with the assistance of artificial intelligence, saying that a human must have made a...more
On February 12, 2024, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced guidance and a request for comments regarding evaluating inventorship for artificial intelligence (AI) assisted inventions (the “AI...more
The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued new guidance on Feb. 12, 2024, regarding the use of artificial intelligence (AI) while developing new inventions. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit...more
In 2022, the Federal Circuit definitively ruled that artificial intelligence (AI) systems cannot be named inventors or co-inventors on patent applications, reinforcing the longstanding principle that only natural persons are...more
One of 2023’s more significant — and potentially disruptive — developments in business and culture was the arrival of a slew of generative artificial intelligence (AI) systems. At the beginning of 2023, ChatGPT quickly...more
Generative artificial intelligence (AI) has the remarkable ability to develop novel solutions to problems, and patent law has historically protected those solutions. Under current statutes and jurisprudence, however, only...more
Artificial intelligence is transforming drug design — but it could also disrupt intellectual property law. To realize AI’s full promise, the US may have to reconsider its approach to issuing patents....more
The Supreme Court dealt the latest blow in Dr. Stephen Thaler’s continuing quest for recognition of AI inventorship of patents, by denying certiorari in Thaler v. Vidal (No. 22-919). Despite support of Dr. Thaler from...more
A new surge in business innovation has arrived as companies take advantage of the unique efficiencies and benefits of artificial intelligence (AI). Recent news headlines about chatbots like ChatGPT and Bard highlight the...more
Dr. Stephen Thaler, Ph.D., a computer scientist and inventor, has petitioned the Supreme Court of the United States to consider the question of whether the Patent Act restricts the definition of an "inventor" to human...more
Steven Thaler filed two patent applications naming “Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Science” (DABUS) as the sole inventor. DABUS is an artificial intelligence software system. The U.S. Patent and Trademark...more
As part of the recovery from the global COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit took steps to return to normal operations. It began requiring live oral arguments in August 2022 and, by November,...more
In Thaler v. Vidal, Appeal No. 21-2347, the Federal Circuit held that, under the Patent Act, an “inventor” must be a natural person. Therefore, an AI system cannot be an inventor. ...more
Can an artificial intelligence (AI) system be an inventor? Not in the eyes of the Federal Circuit and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO). ...more
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently confirmed in Thaler v. Vidalthat artificial intelligence (AI) agents cannot be listed as an inventor on a patent because the plain text of the Patent Act requires...more
The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that an artificial intelligence (AI) software system cannot be listed as an inventor on a patent application because the Patent Act requires an “inventor” to be a natural...more
Thaler v. Vidal, No. 2021-2347 (Fed. Cir. (E.D. Va.) Aug. 5, 2022). Opinion by Stark, joined by Moore and Taranto. Stephen Thaler develops and runs artificial intelligence (AI) systems that he believes generate patentable...more
PATENT CASE OF THE WEEK - Thaler v. Vidal, Appeal No. 2021-2347 (Fed. Cir. Aug. 5, 2022) - In its only precedential patent decision this week, the Federal Circuit answered a question that had long occupied the musings...more