Last summer, we reported on the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision regarding enablement compliance (in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi). The U.S. Patent & Trademark Office has recently responded, publishing new guidelines for enablement, with these guidelines being applicable regardless of the technology.

On October 30, 2023, U.S. President Joe Biden signed an executive order regarding AI to start establishing standards for its protections and regulation. Among other areas of focus, the executive order called on the USPTO to review and provide guidance on AI as it relates to well-established principles concerning inventorship and patentability.

We are pleased to introduce our colleague and partner, Steve Helland. Steve has long provided guidance to clients in legal matters involving information technology, Internet, software, new media and advertising. Steve chairs Fredrikson’s Tech & Data legal group, which further advises on legal issues relating to data privacy, cybersecurity, technology and intellectual property issues.

According to latest trending data, per, the U.S. is the nation most aggressively funding AI technology, with $249 billion dedicated in private funding.

The Federal Circuit has agreed to an en banc hearing of a design patent case that may change the landscape of design patent invalidation in the U.S. The case is LKQ Corp. et al. v. G.M. Global Technology Operations LLC, case number 21-2348.

A recent court decision from the Northern District of California may significantly impact a common strategy, long accepted and practiced among patent holders.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director Vidal announced on July 24, 2023, that litigants can now request a review of Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decisions to either institute or not institute patent challenges.

You may not know it, but November 8, 2023, marked a significant end date for the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO).

The U.S. Supreme Court recently issued its decision in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi; a decision long-awaited by patent practitioners. In its decision, the Court unanimously held that several of Amgen’s patent claims to a class of antibodies were invalid for lack of enablement.

Under U.S. law, patent marking is optional. One may ask, well, then why do it? The short answer; damages.

Stay Informed Flag
Jump to Page

Necessary Cookies

Necessary cookies enable core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility. You may disable these by changing your browser settings, but this may affect how the website functions.

Analytical Cookies

Analytical cookies help us improve our website by collecting and reporting information on its usage. We access and process information from these cookies at an aggregate level.