In the lawsuit brought against them for using visual artists' work to teach their large language model, and producing near-identical copies in response to prompts, Stability AI, Midjourney, DeviantArt, and Runway AI moved to...more
8/30/2024
/ Artificial Intelligence ,
Artificial Reproduction ,
Breach of Contract ,
Copyright ,
Copyright Infringement ,
DMCA ,
False Endorsements ,
Intellectual Property Litigation ,
Intellectual Property Protection ,
Lanham Act ,
Motion to Dismiss ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patents ,
Trade Dress ,
Unjust Enrichment
As discussed previously on this blog (see "USPTO Proposed Rule Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice" and "The USPTO's Proposed Terminal Disclaimer Rule: A Litigator's Perspective") and elsewhere, the U.S. Patent and...more
Since President Biden issued his Executive Order on the Safe, Secure, and Trustworthy Development and Use of Artificial Intelligence, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has been investigating the potential pitfalls of...more
4/16/2024
/ Artificial Intelligence ,
Compliance ,
Confidential Information ,
Disclosure Requirements ,
Electronic System for Trademark Trials and Appeals (ESTTA) ,
Executive Orders ,
Export Administration Regulations (EAR) ,
Export Controls ,
Filing Requirements ,
ITAR ,
New Guidance ,
Patent Applications ,
Patents ,
Trademarks ,
USPTO
On June 22, 2022, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued two documents regarding the Patent Trial and Appeals Board's discretionary denials of post-grant challenges based on parallel litigation: a retrospective study of...more
The Supreme Court, speaking through a five-justice majority, has reaffirmed the equitable principle of assignor estoppel while at the same time limiting its application in Minerva Surgical, Inc. v. Hologic, Inc. Assignor...more
Patent law is replete with arcane (and often judge-made) doctrines, such as the doctrine of equivalence and obviousness-type double patenting. In addition, long having been considered a property right (Oil States to the...more
Although the Federal Circuit faced obviousness issues that were simple to resolve in Adidas AG v. Nike, Inc., it saw an opportunity to continue to clarify its jurisprudence regarding standing on appeal from an adverse final...more
6/29/2020
/ Adidas ,
Appeals ,
Evidence ,
Final Written Decisions ,
Inter Partes Review (IPR) Proceeding ,
Nike ,
Obviousness ,
Patent Infringement ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patents ,
Post-Grant Review ,
Prior Art ,
Remand ,
Reversal ,
SAS Institute Inc. v Iancu ,
Standing
Less than two years ago, in Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Service, 139 S. Ct. 1853 (2018), the Supreme Court held that a government entity -- in that case, the U.S. Postal Service -- is not a "person" under the America...more
4/16/2020
/ America Invents Act ,
Appeals ,
Banks ,
Covered Business Method Proceedings ,
Federal Reserve ,
Government Agencies ,
Patent Invalidity ,
Patent Litigation ,
Patent Trial and Appeal Board ,
Patent-Eligible Subject Matter ,
Patents ,
Return Mail Inc v United States Postal Service
2019 Patent Trial and Appeal Board Key Practice Updates: A Year in Review -
2019 has been an active year for procedural changes in the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”). These changes include not only the PTAB’s...more
Supreme Court Rejects USPTO's Attempt to Recover Attorney's Fees in All District Court "Appeals" from PTAB Decisions -
In Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., decided by the U.S. Supreme Court, the Court considered whether the U.S....more
A patent applicant dissatisfied with a decision by the USPTO’s Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) has two options for review of that decision. Most commonly—by far—the applicant can appeal the decision to the U.S. Court...more
When post-grant proceedings under the America Invents Act began, the USPTO's Patent Trial and Appeals Board ("PTAB") treated motions to amend in those proceedings like most other motions: the movant, here the patentee, bore...more
On the first day of the 2019-20 term, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Peter v. NantKwest, Inc., a case raising the question of whether a patent applicant should be responsible to pay all of the PTO's attorneys' fees...more
The sponsors of the STRONGER Patents Act of 2019 -- introduced to the Senate on July 10, 2019 -- may be from both political parties, but they share one clear trait: they hate what post-grant proceedings have done to patent...more
Every patent must include a written description of the invention sufficient to enable a person of ordinary skill in the art to make and use the invention. A broadening reissue under 35 U.S.C. § 251 must meet a more exacting...more
In this case, the question ultimately answered by the Federal Circuit was a straightforward question of statutory interpretation: in determining whether a party is time-barred from filing a petition for inter partes review...more
In a 6-3 decision, the Supreme Court today held that federal government agencies cannot avail themselves of America Invents Act (AIA) post-grant proceedings. This decision was based on the Court's determination that the...more
In a 6-3 decision rendered earlier on June 10, 2019, the Supreme Court decided that federal agencies are not “persons” who can petition for post-issuance review of patents under the America Invents Act (AIA). Thus, the...more
Parties often push experts to testify outside their area of expertise and leave it up to the expert to push back when uncomfortable. If the expert fails to do so, a party's aggressiveness may come back to haunt it before the...more
AVX Corporation and Presidio Components are long-standing competitors in the market for electronic components, including capacitors. Their competition has caused animosity, which in turn has resulted in patent infringement...more
On the same day that the Supreme Court decided what the term "full costs" means under the Copyright Act, it granted certiorari to consider what "all the expenses of [a district court review] proceeding" means under the Patent...more
Earlier today, February 19, 2019, the Supreme Court heard oral argument in Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Service, which presented the simple question whether the federal government is a "person" entitled to petition for...more
In AIA post-grant proceedings -- specifically, Post-Grant Review ("PGR"), Inter Partes Review ("IPR"), and Covered Business Method ("CBM") review -- the patentee has the right to seek to amend the claims rather than fight...more
On Friday, October 26, 2018, the Supreme Court granted certiorari in Return Mail, Inc. v. U.S. Postal Service, in order to answer the question whether the government can bring post-grant review proceedings under the...more
Under a new PTO administrative rule published today, October 11, 2018, the PTAB will apply the same claim construction standards in IPRs, PGRs, and CBMs filed on November 13, 2018 or later as would apply in litigation. 83...more