On December 20, 2023, the UK Supreme Court dismissed Dr. Stephen Thaler’s appeal from the Court of Appeal (England and Wales), finding that AI cannot be an inventor because an inventor must be a natural person1. This issue...more
As the use of artificial intelligence (AI) in developing new inventions and technologies becomes more prevalent, courts around the world are increasingly addressing whether new inventions developed by AI are eligible for...more
The United Kingdom Supreme Court (the ultimate appeal level in the UK legal system) has ruled in a decision of 20 December 2023 that an artificial intelligence (“AI”) system cannot be identified in a patent application as the...more
In Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trade Marks [2023] UKSC 49, the UK Supreme Court ruled that AI cannot be an ‘inventor’ for the purposes of UK patent law. The ruling concludes a series of appeals from...more
On December 20, 2023, the UK Supreme Court ("Court") dismissed Dr. Stephen Thaler's appeal, unanimously affirming the decision of the Comptroller-General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks ("Comptroller") that a machine which...more
The U.K. Supreme Court has followed the lead of U.S. courts and denied patent rights to an artificial intelligence (AI) system. The case demonstrates a global trend in the current patent law regime to deny inventorship to AI...more
On 20 December 2023 the UK Supreme Court handed down its judgment in the long-running saga of the DABUS patent applications in the United Kingdom. Whilst the judgment is in essence confined to the interpretation of “inventor”...more
We previously discussed the UK Court of Appeal's judgment in Thaler v Comptroller-General of Patents, Trade Marks and Designs in December 2021 (Court of Appeal Judgment on Machine Inventors). Permission to appeal that...more
The recent anti-suit injunction issued against InterDigital in its SEP litigation with Xiaomi is a somewhat predictable reaction to the recent UK Supreme Court decision against Huawei and ZTE. One of the central arguments...more
Recent appellate decisions coming out of the United States and the United Kingdom relating to global FRAND terms for standard essential patents will likely increase the possibility of forum shopping by patent owners and...more
On Aug. 26, 2020, the United Kingdom Supreme Court issued a decision in Unwired Planet International Ltd & Anor v Huawei Technologies (UK) Co Ltd & Anor [2020] UKSC 37 that changes the landscape for patentees seeking to...more
Implementer Hold Out - Another major development in global standard essential patent litigation was handed down today, as the UK Supreme Court upheld lower court rulings that forced an efficient infringer of essential...more
The Court’s decision rested on whether the patents provided outstanding benefit to the employer’s undertaking. On 23 October, the UK Supreme Court (UKSC) handed down its highly anticipated ruling in Shanks v Unilever [2019]...more
The adoption of multiple, standardized technologies looms on the horizon. This presents the challenge of balancing innovator’s intellectual property rights with implementer’s desire for fair access to technology. As more...more
The UK Supreme Court's ruling in Warner Lambert v Actavis resulted from deliberations over the proper approach to matters relating to infringement of second medical use patent claims. The standard proposed by the UK Supreme...more
In its decision of July 12, 2017 in Actavis v. Eli Lilly, the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom for the first time formally adopted the concept of a doctrine of equivalents when considering what constituted an infringement...more
In a decision that appears to have introduced a doctrine of equivalents for the first time, the UK Supreme Court has shifted the laws on patent infringement in Actavis v. Eli Lilly UK [2017] UKSC 48. While this case...more
Worldwide Doctrine of Equivalents and Prosecution History Estoppel - The doctrine of equivalents (DOE) arises in the context of a patent infringement action where the accused product or process does not literally infringe...more
The UK Supreme Court’s recent judgment in Actavis v Eli Lilly sets out a revised approach to assessing the scope of protection of patents. The new approach is likely to confer greater protection on patent owners, by providing...more
In what is perhaps the most important development in English law of the last decade in this area of interpretation of patent claims and patent infringement, the UK Supreme Court gave new life to the doctrine of equivalents in...more
The UK Supreme Court rarely hears patent cases, and will only hear cases that it considers to be fundamentally important. The court's July 12 judgment is most significant for changing the test for infringement in the United...more
Following last Friday’s (7 July 2017) unusual move of advance publication of the outcome of the case, the UK Supreme Court now published the reasons for its decision in the long-running Actavis v Eli Lilly case. The reasons...more