The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit once called the remedy for inequitable conduct “the atomic bomb of patent law.” Inequitable conduct is a defense against patent infringement that can render a patent...more
The new United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John A. Squires was sworn in on September 22, 2025 and wasted no time that week in expanding patent eligibility for AI related inventions. ...more
The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) has issued a decision in an ex parte appeal reversing an examiner’s final rejection under 35 U.S.C. § 101 of claims directed to artificial intelligence (AI) based business methods. Ex...more
Section 101 Blog If you work anywhere near patent eligibility, the rhythm is familiar. Another year, another reform drumbeat. Draft language circulates on the Hill. Industry groups publish letters. Academics and the familiar...more
Introduction - The new United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John A. Squires was sworn in on September 22, 2025 and wasted no time that week in expanding patent eligibility for AI related inventions. In...more
Who should read this article? Companies sued by patent trolls (NPEs) seeking to develop strategies to push back against NPE activity—and specifically companies in the following industries...more
What’s New: USPTO Embraces Evidence-Driven § 101 Practice - The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently issued two coordinated memoranda explaining how applicants can use Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations...more
Key Takeaways - Easier path to eligibility: The USPTO’s new guidance explains how to use sworn statements (SMEDs) to provide facts showing an invention is eligible for a patent....more
The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued new guidance encouraging applicants to use subject matter eligibility declarations (SMEDs), highlighting their potential influence at all stages of the...more
One might be forgiven for assuming, based on a cursory reading of the Constitution or perhaps a fleeting bout of logic, that the U.S. patent system exists to promote the progress of science and useful arts. Historically, this...more
On Dec. 4, 2025, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Squires issued new guidance to patent examiners and applicants via a pair of memoranda (Guidance) encouraging the use of subject matter eligibility...more
In follow up to the August 4, 2025 guidance and September 26, 2025 In re Desjardins decision, the USPTO recently took another significant step to provide patentees pursuing patent protection additional tools to address patent...more
Every year has its “it” term.In 2025, the crown belonged to AI, and rightfully so. AI dominated the headlines, flooded the USPTO’s dockets, and triggered more §101 rejections than any examiner would care to admit. If you...more
On December 4, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued a memorandum to the Patent Examining Corps reinforcing its existing subject matter eligibility framework under 35 U.S.C. § 101 and calling renewed attention to...more
Late last week, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published three memos addressing its latest policies regarding subject matter eligibility. These included “Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations” from Director...more
On December 4, 2025, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires issued two memoranda addressing subject matter eligibility and spotlighting an additional pathway to overcome a rejection under 35 U.S.C. §...more
Patent practitioners have seen a shifting landscape for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 since the Supreme Court’s 2012 and 2014 seminal decisions in Mayo and Alice. Now, the United States Patent and Trademark Office...more
Once upon a time, patent eligibility was not controversial or difficult to understand. Then along came Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, and with it the Supreme Court’s bright idea to replace statutory clarity with metaphysical...more
On November 4, 2025, the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) designated as precedential an appeals review panel (ARP) decision vacating the Patent Trial & Appeal Board’s § 101 rejection of claims...more
From a technical standpoint, everything a computer does involves reading, manipulating, and storing information through microcode instructions that move around 0’s and 1’s. Each operation performed by a processor, such as...more
It has been over a decade since the Supreme Court blessed us with the two-step framework for patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank. First, one must determine whether the claim at issue is...more
On October 31, 2025, Director Squires spoke to the American Intellectual Property Law Association and provided a forceful statement on his view for the direction of patent law. Of particular interest were his comments on...more
Following a dismissal on the pleadings, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York granted the defendant’s motion for attorneys’ fees under 35 U.S.C. § 285 after concluding that the asserted patent was...more
In an opinion synthesizing and applying the current state of Section 101 law, Judge William Bryson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation in a district court, held on summary judgment...more
Patent eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101 should be a straightforward threshold question: any “new and useful process, machine, manufacture, or composition of matter” is eligible for protection. Yet over time, this once-clear...more