Remove 2002 Remove Inventor Remove Patent
article thumbnail

Humanizing Technology: Back to Basics on DABUS and AI as Inventors

IP Watchdog

With South Africa’s patent office having recently granted the first patent to an AI inventor, and an Australian court ruling in favor of AI inventorship, it’s time to review how we got here—and where we’re going. If AI-related patent applications and grants are on the uptick, what was the problem with DABUS?

Inventor 142
article thumbnail

Innovating the Term ‘Inventor’: AI and Patent Law

IPilogue

Recently, AI technology once again exceeded the legal community’s expectations by filing a patent for its invention of interlocking food containers. Under patent law, it is the general expectation that inventors are humans, not robots. Europe, Australia, and South Africa, only Australia and South Africa granted this patent.

Inventor 105
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

Understanding the Indian Biological Diversity law, and its implications for Patent Applications involving Biological Resources

Selvam & Selvam Blog

India’s commitment to conserving its rich biodiversity is reflected in the Biological Diversity Act (BDA) of 2002. For inventors seeking to patent inventions involving biological resources, the Act mandates obtaining approval from the National Biodiversity Authority (NBA). – Location and source of the resources.

article thumbnail

Can AI Technology Create a Patent in Canada? A Look at Global Precedence

IPilogue

Apotex ], I have decided to look at precedence from around the world where courts have contemplated recognizing artificial intelligence (AI) technology as an “inventor.” However, this 2002 decision did not define whether AI technology can be an inventor. Australia: Thaler v Commissioner of Patents [2021] FCA 879.

article thumbnail

Full Scope Written Description

Patently-O

The COVID vaccines do not genetically modify your DNA, but Juno’s patented CAR T-Cell therapy certainly does. The patent claims a nucleic acid polymer (DNA/RNA) that encodes for a particular “chimeric T cell receptor.” But, the patent does not actually disclose the DNA sequence of such a binding element.

Inventor 132
article thumbnail

Infographic | Valentine’s day patents

Olartemoure Blog

Get to know a bit more about these patents that have added a touch of creativity and technology to the season of love. METHOD OF MAKING A HEART-SHAPED DIAMOND US6434805B2 Inventor: Ami Haimoff Assignee: L I D Ltd Date of Patent: Aug. 20, 2002 Diamond rings are the perfect gift to give to celebrate love.

Patent 105
article thumbnail

Amgen Inc. v. Sandoz Inc, No. 2022-1147 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 19, 2023)

Intellectual Property Law Blog

This case is an appellate review of the district court’s findings regarding patent obviousness and priority date. Amgen also owns three patents — the ’638, ’101, and ’541 patents — covering Otezla. Issues Is the ’638 patent invalid as obvious given objective indicia of non-obviousness? Both Amgen and Sandoz appealed.

Art 130