Remove 2024 Remove Designs Remove Inventor Remove Litigation
article thumbnail

USPTO Releases Inventorship Guidance for AI-assisted Inventions

LexBlog IP

The USPTO released inventorship guidance on February 12, 2024, for inventions assisted by artificial intelligence (AI). The Federal Circuit previously held that an AI system cannot be listed as an inventor in Thaler v. A person who designs, builds, or trains the AI system in view of a specific problem to elicit a particular solution.

article thumbnail

Who Invented This? The Continuing Importance of Human Ingenuity in Patenting AI Related Inventions

IP Tech Blog

The Guidance acknowledges the importance of human inventors in AI-assisted inventions, so that the patent system can continue to incentivize and reward human ingenuity. Vidal , which held that “only a natural person can be an inventor,” and consequently, that an AI system cannot assume that role. In compliance with section 5.2(c)(i)

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Texas Startup Must Litigate Apple in California because of Convenience to the Tech Giant

Patently-O

2024-121 (Fed. June 25, 2024). Haptic is headquartered in Austin at the home of its longtime CEO and listed inventor Jake Boshernitzan. The patent and Knocki product are designed to expand touch interfaces beyond traditional touchscreens, potentially opening up new modes of interaction with smart devices and appliances.

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (July 29-August 4)

SpicyIP

Highlights of the Week Comments on the Draft Trade Marks (Holding Inquiry and Appeal) Rules, 2024 Comments on the Draft Trade Marks (Holding Inquiry and Appeal) Rules, 2024 Read on below for the comments on the draft Rules by Rishabh Deshpande, Praharsh Gour, and Swaraj Barooah. Anything we are missing out on?

article thumbnail

Gilead and ViiV Healthcare Settle Global Patent Dispute for Over $1B USD

IPilogue

For example, a patent could describe a bike with two wheels (bicycle), three wheels (tricycle), or four wheels (quadracycle) and then only claim the two-wheeled design. Under this doctrine, the inventor could not then sue another for using the three-wheeled or four-wheeled design. There are also significant profits at stake.

Patent 120
article thumbnail

Nexus of AI, AI Regulation and Dispute Resolution

LexBlog IP

However, the use of AI in litigation also bears risk, as highlighted by a recent First-tier Tribunal (Tax) decision, where an appellant had sought to rely on precedent authorities that, in fact, were fabricated by AI (a known risk with AI using large language models, referred to as hallucination). [1]

article thumbnail

Regeneron Seeks Expedited Trial in BPCIA Case Against Mylan Regarding Aflibercept Biosimilar

LexBlog IP

According to Regeneron, “[b]ecause FDA could approve Mylan’s proposed Eylea® biosimilar in May 2024,” a trial is needed no later than June 2023, “so that Regeneron may avail itself of the relief provided by § 271(e)(4)(D).” 271(e)(4)(D). .” 271(e)(4)(D). .” 271(e)(4)(D).