News & Analysis as of

Alice/Mayo Patents

Knobbe Martens

Practical Application and Particular Treatment: What the USPTO’s December 4 Memorandum Means for Life Sciences §101 Eligibility

Knobbe Martens on

The USPTO’s December 4, 2025 memorandum on Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations (SMEDs) seeks to raise awareness of the “underutilized path” of submitting Rule 132 declarations, referred to as “SMEDs”, for supporting §101...more

WilmerHale

Federal Circuit Patent Watch: Patent Related to Web Conferencing Systems Found Patent-Ineligible

WilmerHale on

Precedential and Key Federal Circuit Opinions - U.S. PATENT NO. 7,679,637 LLC v. GOOGLE LLC [OPINION] (2024‑1520, 01/22/2026) (Moore, Hughes, Stoll) - Moore, C.J. The Court affirmed the district court’s dismissal of U.S....more

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

McDermott Will & Schulte

Can’t patent idea of using asynchronous data streams during web conferencing

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed a district court’s dismissal of a patent infringement suit, holding that the asserted web conferencing claims were directed to an abstract idea, lacked any inventive...more

Hudnell Law Group

Result-Oriented Software Claims Fall Short as Federal Circuit Demands Technological Improvement

Hudnell Law Group on

On January 22, 2026, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the Rule 12 dismissal of a patent infringement action brought by US Patent No. 7,679,637 LLC against Google LLC, holding that the...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

Alston & Bird

Patent Case Summaries | Week Ending January 23, 2026

Alston & Bird on

Our Patent Case Summaries provide a weekly summary of the precedential patent-related opinions issued by the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the opinions designated precedential or informative by the Patent Trial...more

Schwabe, Williamson & Wyatt PC

Latest Federal Court Cases: Mark A. Barry v. DePuy Synthes Companies

In our Case of the Week, a divided Federal Circuit panel reviewed an E.D. Pa. court’s exclusion of two experts’ testimony on infringement and damages issues in a case involving handheld surgical tools for treating spinal...more

Fenwick & West LLP

Federal Circuit Issues Precedential Decision Reframing Patent Eligibility Analysis Under Section 101

Fenwick & West LLP on

Patent eligibility decisions are not new. Courts have grappled with what can and cannot be patented for years, especially in the technology and software spaces. A recent decision from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal...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

Alston & Bird

USPTO Clarifies Role of Declarations in Overcoming Subject Matter Eligibility Rejections

Alston & Bird on

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

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

BakerHostetler

Strategies and Considerations for Optimally Using Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations Before the USPTO

BakerHostetler on

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

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

USPTO Issues Memoranda on Subject Matter Eligibility

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

Morrison & Foerster LLP

USPTO Puts Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations in the Spotlight

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

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part II: The Mental Steps Doctrine Literally Makes No Sense

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

McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff LLP

Why the Alice Test is Stupid, Part I: It is Actually Three Different Tests

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

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

178 Results
 / 
View per page
Page: of 8

"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