Risk Prevention Strategies: Ownership of Employee-Developed Inventions and Intellectual Property
On February 13, 2024, the US Patent & Trademark Office (PTO) issued a notice with examination guidance and request for comment regarding inventorship in applications involving artificial intelligence (AI)-assisted inventions....more
New York state recently amended Labor Law Section 203-f, codifying a hurdle for employers who seek to claim ownership over an employee's inventions. The law, which is similar to laws enacted in other states[1], has three...more
On September 15, 2023, a new law was signed in New York that prohibits employers from requiring that employees assign certain intellectual property rights to their employer. This new law impacts policies and practices that...more
A recently enacted New York State law that took effect immediately restricts employers’ use of employment agreements which require that employees assign to their employer rights to inventions that were created by the employee...more
In recent weeks, New York enacted various employment laws that provide additional protections for New York employees. After reviewing the below, which summarizes the new laws in descending order of effective date, employers...more
On September 15, 2023, New York Governor Kathy Hochul signed into law a new section of the New York Labor Law limiting the assignment of inventions by employees to their employers. Specifically, Section 203-f of the Labor Law...more
In July 2022, the Seventh Circuit issued an opinion making it clear that employers must put in place written invention assignment agreements if they want to ensure ownership of employee inventions...more
A patent has the attributes of intangible personal property - it can be sold or mortgaged; it may be bequeathed by a will; and it may pass to the heirs of a deceased patentee. The patent law provides for the transfer or sale...more
Companies often hire employees to develop new products, improve processes, create new technologies, and develop new markets. But how should employers address the ownership of intellectual property created by their employees...more
On this week’s episode, George Summerfield and Kelly Plummer explore five key questions academic medical centers often face with respect to patent ownership and enforcement. Their discussion covers a number of issues,...more
On January 22, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s decision in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., No. 17-1229 (Jan. 22, 2019)....more
Addressing whether the on-sale bar of America Invents Act (AIA) 35 USC § 102(a)(1) applies to confidential sales where specific details are not made public, the Supreme Court of the United States found that the post-AIA...more
If the term "happy hour" in this article's title caught your attention, you may be disappointed by what comes next. This article is actually about limitations on patent protection, which I would argue is just as...more
Squib of Holding and Key Implication: The United States Supreme Court, in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., held on January 22, 2019 that "a commercial sale to a third party who is required to keep...more
Helsinn confirmed that the AIA did not alter the meaning of the “on-sale” bar. In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc, the Supreme Court addressed whether a confidential sale of an invention to a...more
Originally published in The Journal Record | January 31, 2019. This month, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its opinion in Helsinn Healthcare v. Teva Pharmaceuticals, confirming that private sales of an invention may preclude...more
The Supreme Court recently issued its closely-watched decision in Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., which has direct implications regarding the scope of § 102 prior art under the America Invents Act...more
Prior to the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”), the patent statute (35 U.S.C. § 102(b)) prohibited patenting an invention that was “on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for...more
Inventors should not delay the filing of their patent applications, and preferably should file within one year of any commercialization of the invention, as confirmed by the Supreme Court on January 22, 2019....more
In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Supreme Court interpreted the “on sale bar” of the America Invents Act (AIA) version of 35 U.S.C. § 102 as unchanged from the pre-AIA version. In so doing, the...more
In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA Inc, the United States Supreme Court held that a prior public sale of a patented product could destroy the novelty of a patent for that product even though there was no...more
U.S. patent law states that any invention that was “on sale in this country, more than one year prior to the date of the application for patent” is not eligible for patent protection. The Supreme Court recently confirmed...more
The America Invents Act (“AIA”), also called the Patent Reform Act of 2011, was enacted to overhaul the U.S. patent system and harmonize the domestic patent laws with those in the rest of the world. The AIA also created new...more
In Helsinn Healthcare S.A. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc., the Supreme Court affirmed the Federal Circuit’s decision that the sale of an invention to a party who is contractually obligated to keep the invention...more