article thumbnail

Before the Breakthrough: Does Prior Art Include Wrongfully Published Applications?

SpicyIP

Vandana Parvez vs The Controller of Patents , dealt with a withdrawn patent application that had been wrongfully published and then later cited as prior art for the same applicant’s subsequent patent application! Despite the withdrawal of the appellant’s patent application, it was wrongfully published.

Art 105
article thumbnail

AI-Assisted Inventions: Are They Patentable? Who is the Inventor?

Intellectual Property Law Blog

Generative artificial intelligence (AI) may change how we invent: many envision a collaborative approach between human inventors and AI systems that develop novel solutions to problems together. Such AI-assisted inventions present a new set of legal issues under patent law. On February 13, 2024, the U.S. 101 and 115.

Inventor 130
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

AI as an Inventing Tool – it’s Implications for Patent Law

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch Berkely Center for Law & Technology is hosting a great half-day virtual-conference this week: “AI as an Inventing Tool – it’s Implications for Patent Law” organized by Prof. It is then interesting to think about whether the level of skill in the art is changed by the addition of AI.

article thumbnail

UPC takes strong stance on therapeutic antibody inventions (Sanofi v Amgen, UPC_CFI_1/202)

The IPKat

The UPC Central Division also takes a strong stance on the patentability of therapeutic antibody inventions in Europe. The decision of the UPC confirms that the US and European approaches to antibody inventions are diametrically opposed. The decision is not just remarkable for being the first decision of its kind.

article thumbnail

Discerning Signal from Noise: Navigating the Flood of AI-Generated Prior Art

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch This article explores the impact of Generative AI on prior art and potential revisions to patent examination standards to address the rising tidal wave of AI-generated, often speculative, disclosures that could undermine the patent system’s integrity. Still, seemingly qualify as prior art under 35 U.S.C.

Art 109
article thumbnail

The Legacy of A.B. Dick and Motion Picture Patents: How these 100+ Year Old Ruling Reshaped Patent Law

Patently-O

” The dissenters saw a fundamental distinction between a patentee’s exclusive rights in the patented invention itself versus contractual rights in unpatented articles used with the invention. Soon thereafter, the “Oldfield Bill” proposed a number of limitations on patent rights.

article thumbnail

The relevance of G 2/21 to machine learning inventions (T 2803/18)

The IPKat

The Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) decision in G 2/21 related to the evidence requirement for a purported technical effect relied on for inventive step. The Board of Appeal in T 2803/18 , in particular, highlights how G 2/21 may be relevant to inventions in the field of artificial intelligence and machine learning.