article thumbnail

Revolution Rope Inventor Tells Justices She Deserves Her Day in Article III Court

IP Watchdog

The inventor of a novel jump rope system (the Revolution Rope), Molly Metz, argued in a reply brief to the U.S. Supreme Court filed on behalf of her company, Jump Rope Systems, LLC, on Tuesday that her case against Rogue Fitness is justiciable and the company has standing despite the cancellation of her patent claims by the U.S.

Inventor 125
article thumbnail

US Inventor Urges CAFC to Review Implementation of Rule 36

IP Watchdog

Yesterday, US Inventor, Inc. USI) filed an amicus brief in Island Intellectual Property LLC v. TD Ameritrade, Inc., urging the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) to reconsider its use of Rule 36 when affirming decisions.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Supreme Court Dodges AI Inventor Question with Denial of DABUS Case

IP Watchdog

Vidal, which asked the Court to consider the question: “Does the Patent Act categorically restrict the statutory term ‘inventor’ to human beings alone?” Dr. Stephen Thaler lost his case at the U.S.

Inventor 130
article thumbnail

US Inventor Arguments for Opposing the Pride in Patent Ownership Act Fall Short on the Merits

IP Watchdog

Right now, inventors, businesses, and other interested members of the public often have to undertake time consuming and expensive litigation to determine who owns a patent.

Ownership 126
article thumbnail

CAFC ‘Unambiguously’ Backs USPTO in AI as Inventor Fight

IP Watchdog

Vidal that an artificial intelligence (AI) machine does not qualify as an inventor under the Patent Act. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) ruled today in Thaler v. The decision is the latest in a series of rulings around the world considering the topic, most of which have found similarly. Judge Stark authored the opinion.

Inventor 134
article thumbnail

UK Supreme Court Dismisses DABUS as Inventor

IP Watchdog

While the Court suggested that questions such as whether inventions like DABUS’ should be patentable and if the meaning of the term “inventor” should be expanded are important ones that should be considered at a policy level, the present case was concerned solely with the interpretation of the present law, which clearly does not contemplate non-human (..)

article thumbnail

Guest Post by Profs. Lemley & Ouellette: Fixing Double Patenting

Patently-O

In our new draft article, Fixing Double Patenting , we argue that this outcry is unwarranted. These efforts will enable inventors and the USPTO to focus on what should be important—inventing and patenting new inventions rather than multiplying patents on trivial variants of old inventions.

Patent 117