article thumbnail

Does Justice Thomas Hate Invention or Just the Hubris of Inventors?

Patently-O

While the majority opinion, authored by Justice Kavanaugh, upheld the MRT, Justice Thomas published a strong dissent relying upon an invention metaphor in a decidedly negative light, something that he has done in several other recent opinions. ” Justice Thomas is not alone in his negative view of judicial invention. .”

article thumbnail

Women’s History Month: USPTO Highlights Trailblazing Women Inventors

U.S. Department of Commerce

Women’s History Month: USPTO Highlights Trailblazing Women Inventors. In honor of Women’s History Month, and as part of its efforts to protect and promote the ingenuity of American inventors and entrepreneurs, the Department of Commerce’s U.S. She will be inducted into the National Inventors Hall of Fame (NIHF) this year.

Inventor 122
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

The Inventive Concept: Unclear Judicial Guidance Causes Frustration for Inventors

LexBlog IP

What is at the core of invention? All inventions boil down to applying some natural law , but where is the line between natural law and invention? ” The most recent Supreme Court case which granted certiorari with regard to an “inventive concept” is Alice Corp. CLS Bank Int’l , decided in 2014.

article thumbnail

The Quest for a Meaningful Threshold of Invention: Atlantic Works v. Brady (1883)

Patently-O

The Supreme Court ultimately reversed the lower court’s decision upholding the patent and found instead that Brady’s claimed invention lacked novelty and did not constitute a patentable advance over the prior art. Such inventors are worthy of all favor. Brady for an improved dredge boat design. 63, 67 (2020).

article thumbnail

SCOTUS: “The More a Party Claims for Itself the More it Must Enable”

Intellectual Property Law Blog

After a nine-year saga, beginning when Amgen sued Sanofi for allegedly infringing two of its patents in 2014, the Supreme Court held that Amgen’s asserted patents failed to satisfy the enablement requirement under 35 U.S.C. § 112(a), and are thus invalid. In re Wands , 858 F.2d 2d at 737, 8 USPQ2d at 1404 (Fed.

Invention 246
article thumbnail

Ambiguity Begets Ambiguity: A Legislative Attempt to Bring Clarity to Patentable Subject Matter May Bring More Confusion

JD Supra Law

4734) in an effort to clarify which inventions are actually patentable and to codify those that are not. 208 (2014), courts, attorneys and inventors have struggled with the metes and bounds of what subject matter can and what cannot be patented. Tillis introduced the Patent Eligibility Restoration Act (S.4734)

article thumbnail

Intellectual Property Rights in the Age of Artificial Intelligence: Navigating Challenges and Seizing Opportunities

IIPRD

Analyzing the convergence of AI and IPR laws, it elucidates the challenges and ambiguities in recognizing AI as inventors or creators. Ai doesn’t understand what it’s doing in the way that a person does but functionally what it is doing is the same thing that an author or an inventor may be doing.