What Were the Cooler Wars? (Part 2) — No Infringement Intended Podcast
A Guide to SEP: Standard Essential Patents for Tech Startups
Wolf Greenfield’s New Shareholders
5 Key Takeaways | Building a Winning Evidentiary Record at the PTAB (and Surviving Appeal)
Wolf Greenfield Attorneys Review 2024 and Look Ahead to 2025
5 Key Takeaways | Alice at 10: A Section 101 Update
Director Review Under the USPTO's Final Rule – Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
AGG Talks: Cross-Border Business Podcast - Episode 20: Mastering ITC Section 337 Investigations
Navigating Intellectual Property Challenges in the Renewable Energy Sector - Energy Law Insights
Patent Considerations in View of the Nearshoring Trends to the Americas
Tonia Sayour in the Spotlight
New Developments in Obviousness-Type Double Patenting and Original Patent Requirements — Patents: Post-Grant Podcast
3 Key Takeaways | What Corporate Counsel Need to Know About Patent Damages
5 Key Takeaways | Rolling with the Legal Punches: Resetting Patent Strategy to Address Changes in the Law
Meet Meaghan Luster: Patent Litigation Associate at Wolf Greenfield
Legal Alert: USPTO Proposes Major Change to Terminal Disclaimer Practice
PODCAST: Williams Mullen's Trending Now: An IP Podcast - Artificial Intelligence Patents & Emerging Regulatory Laws
Are Your Granted Patents in Danger of a Post-Grant Double Patenting Challenge?
Patent Litigation: How Low Can You Go?
The Briefing: The Patent Puzzle: USPTO's Guidelines for AI Inventions
On May 12, 2025, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated-in-part and remanded a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) decision in an interference proceeding concluding that the Broad Institute, Inc. (“Broad...more
On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a long-awaited decision in Regents of the University of California v. Broad Institute (Nos. 22-1594, 22-1653) addressing priority for disputed...more
Regents of the Univ. of California v. Broad Inst., Inc., No. 2022-1594, 2025 WL 1363125 (Fed. Cir. May 12, 2025) - On May 12, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated the Patent Trial and Appeals...more
Addressing the distinction between conception and reduction to practice and the requirement for written description in the unpredictable arts, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit explained that proof of conception...more
The Regents of the University of California, et al. v. The Broad Institute, Inc., et al., Nos. 2022-1594, -1653 (Fed. Cir. (PTAB) May 12, 2025). Opinion by Reyna, joined by Hughes and Cunningham....more
The CRISPR-Cas9 patent landscape remains complex and unsettled. The Federal Circuit’s latest decision in University of California v. Broad Institute1 revived the high-stakes dispute between UC2 and Broad3 over foundational...more
In a year defined by landmark decisions, impactful announcements and new standards, clarity in the patent world comes as a welcome relief. It arrived via a federal circuit court decision in August 2024 that settled certain...more
The use of microorganisms in human industry is ancient, but has increased markedly in recent years. The modern recognition of the role of microbial communities in the human body has intensified innovation in fields like...more
What does it take to patent an invention on artificial intelligence or machine learning? According to a recent federal appeals court decision, it takes more than just applying a known technique to new data. Rather, the patent...more
On April 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit ("Federal Circuit") issued a significant decision in Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., Case No. 2023-2437 (Apr. 18, 2025), affirming...more
On April 18, 2025, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed the dismissal of a patent infringement suit brought by Recentive Analytics, Inc. against Fox Corporation. See Recentive Analytics, Inc. v....more
Summary: In Recentive Analytics, Inc. v. Fox Corp., No. 2023-2437 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 18, 2025), the Federal Circuit delivered a clear warning: simply applying generic AI-based models to new environments is not enough to secure...more
Recent changes at the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) concerning the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's (PTAB) discretion to deny institution of inter partes reviews (IPRs) or post-grant reviews (PGRs) based on parallel...more
Recent developments at the USPTO suggest a significant shift in favor of the PTAB exercising discretionary denial and uncertainty on behalf of parties to PTAB proceedings. ...more
A recent decision from a California federal district court should make patent prosecutors and their clients more alert when looking at recent prior art references: they may refer to patent applications filed by competitors...more
Join Katherine Evans from Mirkwood Evans Vincent, as she sits down with IR Global’s Expertise Unlocked podcast host Jennifer Riggins to discuss everything you need to know about Standard Essential Patents (SEPs), and the...more
Does a claim that merely recites an inherent property of an otherwise obvious claim require an additional analysis to demonstrate that a person of ordinary skill in the art would have had a reasonable expectation of success...more
In the biotechnology and chemical spaces, genus claims are often sought by patent applicants to protect not only a specific product of interest, but also as a means to protect against others making related products that...more
The patent world tends to think that the Supreme Court’s framework in Alice is a template for determining the eligibility of software and business method inventions. Under 35 U.S.C. § 101, abstract ideas are not eligible for...more
On March 3, 2025, the Supreme Court of Japan upheld the original judgment that found patent infringement in respect of the acts performed on a server located outside Japan, virtually affirming the extraterritorial application...more
On June 7, 2024, the Federal Court issued its Judgment and Reasons in Tekna Plasma Systems Inc v AP&C Advanced Powders & Coatings Inc ( 2024 FC 871), finding all claims of the Defendant’s Canadian Patent No 3,003,502 (502...more
Determining whether a claimed invention is obvious under 35 U.S.C. § 103 often depends on whether the prior art provides a clear motivation for modifying existing knowledge. Central to this analysis is the concept of a...more
As reported by Quantum Insider, this past week, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) at the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) overturned an examiner's rejections of an application directed to a quantum...more
While courts have often warned that hindsight bias should be avoided when assessing whether a patented invention would have been obvious to the skilled person, the application of this principle can be challenging in practice....more
Unity of invention and double patenting law and practice in Canada can create challenges for patent applicants. For example, applicants may not expect a unity of invention objection to be raised, requiring claims to be...more