Month: February 2024

  • By Kevin E. Noonan – The Federal Circuit's In re Cellect decision has caused a great deal of commentary and proposals to avoid its consequences, including changing prosecution strategies and filing prospective, precautionary terminal disclaimers (see "Overcoming the Consequences of In re Cellect") to reimbue predictability regarding patent term to patent portfolio prosecution (as well as there…

  • By Michael Borella — On December 27, 2023, The New York Times Company ("The Times") sued several OpenAI entities and their stakeholder Microsoft ("OpenAI") in the Southern District of New York for copyright infringement, vicarious copyright infringement, contributory copyright infringement, violation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), unfair competition, and trademark dilution (complaint).  Unlike…

  • By Kevin E. Noonan – A consequence (predominantly negative) of the Supreme Court's recent foray into defining (however inadequately) the contours of patent-eligible subject matter is to give the district courts (and to a somewhat lesser extent, the Patent and Trademark Office) free rein to apply any Supreme Court precedent (no matter how archaic, ill-defined or incoherently…

  • By Aaron Gin and Michael Borella – On February 12, 2024, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office released detailed guidance regarding inventorship of inventions created with the assistance of artificial intelligence (AI).  The guidance, signed by Kathi Vidal, Under Secretary of Commerce for Intellectual Property and Director of the USPTO, is scheduled to be published in the…

  • By Kevin E. Noonan – One of the most notable consequences (intended or not, for good or ill) of the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA) has been the possibility (now likelihood, if only in frequency) that the decisions of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board and district courts will be different (typically to the detriment of patent…