News & Analysis as of

Alice/Mayo Machine Learning

Sterne, Kessler, Goldstein & Fox P.L.L.C.

IP Hot Topic: Federal Circuit’s RPI v. Amazon Questioning Tests the Boundaries of Machine Learning Patent Eligibility...

Less than a year after holding that generic machine-learning patents are abstract in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., the Federal Circuit may be refining where to draw the line on patent eligibility....more

Baker Botts L.L.P.

A New Playbook for § 101? The USPTO's Guidance on Using Technical Evidence

Baker Botts L.L.P. on

Section 101 eligibility remains one of the most unpredictable and frequently contested areas of U.S. patent practice, particularly for software, artificial intelligence, and machine learning....more

Sheppard Mullin Richter & Hampton LLP

Not A Categorical Ban: Federal Circuit Narrowed Spectrum of Patent Eligible Machine Learning Claims

Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., No. 23-2437 (Fed. Cir. 2025) – On April 18, 2025, the Federal Circuit upheld the district court’s dismissal of the case on the ground that the patents were ineligible under § 101....more

McDonald Hopkins

The recent expansion of patent eligibility for AI inventions before the USPTO

McDonald Hopkins on

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

Fish & Richardson

PTAB Reverses § 101 Rejection Under Desjardins Framework

Fish & Richardson on

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

International Lawyers Network

The Recent Expansion of Patent Eligibility for AI Inventions Before the USPTO

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

Lowenstein Sandler LLP

USPTO Outlines New Path for Overcoming § 101 Rejections Through Rule 132 Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations

Lowenstein Sandler LLP on

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part IV: The Usefulness Paradox

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

Seyfarth Shaw LLP

Hottest Patent Term of 2026? SMED.

Seyfarth Shaw LLP on

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

ArentFox Schiff

SMEDs in the Spotlight: USPTO Memo Highlights Use of Rule 132 Declarations for § 101

ArentFox Schiff on

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

Venable LLP

The § 101 Reset for 2026

Venable LLP on

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

McDermott Will & Schulte

Precedential shift: USPTO clarifies patentability of AI training methods

McDermott Will & Schulte on

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

Knobbe Martens

The USPTO’s Evolving Approach to Patent Eligibility: Insights from Director Squires’ AIPLA Address

Knobbe Martens on

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

Foley & Lardner LLP

From Abstract to Applied: How Desjardins Can Reframe Patent Protection for AI in Health Care

Foley & Lardner LLP on

For a decade, innovators at the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and precision medicine have faced a stubborn paradox: the very breakthroughs in software and machine learning that enable early cancer detection and...more

Mayer Brown

USPTO Encourages AI Innovation as Federal Circuit Exercises Caution

Mayer Brown on

With the continued rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI), the question of how the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”) and courts will apply patent-eligibility requirements to AI has been at the...more

BakerHostetler

Shifting Views on Section 101 and AI under Director Squires

BakerHostetler on

In a rare procedural move, the United States Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO) director-convened Appeals Review Panel (ARP) recently vacated a § 101 rejection that had been introduced by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board...more

Womble Bond Dickinson

USPTO Director Indicates Significant Shift in AI Patent-Eligibility

Womble Bond Dickinson on

New U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires has been on the job less than a month, but he has already indicated a significant shift in the USPTO’s willingness to extend patent protection to artificial...more

Kilpatrick

Patent Office Appeals Review Decision Suggests Policy Shift Toward Broader Eligibility for AI-Related Patent Applications

Kilpatrick on

Last week, the USPTO published a rare Appeals Review Panel (ARP) decision in Ex parte Desjardins, Appeal 2024-000567, September 26, 2025 (“ARP Decision”), that reversed a finding of ineligible subject matter in a patent...more

ArentFox Schiff

Landmark Patent Appeal Decision Strengthens Protection for AI and Machine Learning Innovations

ArentFox Schiff on

A significant Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision authored by the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) leadership, including the new USPTO Director John A. Squires, signals the importance of artificial...more

Morrison & Foerster LLP

USPTO Director Signals Support for AI Patent Eligibility

Just days after John A. Squires was sworn in as the 60th Director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on September 23, 2025, he convened the rarely used Appeals Review Panel (ARP) and issued a decision in Ex parte...more

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

New USPTO Director Squires Takes an Early Position on Patent Eligibility

Just a few days into his tenure as director of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, John A. Squires has sent a message to the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) to tone down its aggressive use of § 101. This message comes...more

McCarter & English, LLP

Helpful Reminders for Patent Eligibility of AI, Machine Learning, and Other Software-Related Inventions

Patent applications for artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, and other software-related inventions are often rejected by the US Patent and Trademark Office (Patent Office) as being too abstract and thus ineligible...more

BakerHostetler

Navigating Patent Eligibility in the Age of AI: Strategic Insights from the USPTO’s August 2025 Guidance

BakerHostetler on

The August 4, 2025 memorandum (Memo) issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) clarifies how examiners should approach subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101. Importantly, the Memo provides critical...more

Morgan Lewis

USPTO Memo Clarifies AI/ML Patent Eligibility Rules

Morgan Lewis on

Deputy Commissioner for Patents Charles Kim issued a memorandum to three technology centers reminding examiners how subject matter eligibility should be evaluated under 35 USC § 101. These technology centers often handle...more

Foley & Lardner LLP

USPTO Clarifies Eligibility Examination Standards for Software Innovations

Foley & Lardner LLP on

On August 4, 2025, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) released a new memorandum to patent examiners in Technology Centers 2100, 2600, and 3600, providing targeted reminders on evaluating subject matter eligibility...more

50 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 2

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
- hide
- hide