Expert Analysis

• Eye Drop Ruling Clarifies Importance Of Patent Phrasing

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent ruling in Eye Therapies v. Slayback, rejecting the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's interpretation of "consisting essentially of," highlights the importance of using clear and consistent terms throughout a patent's filing history to shield it against future challenges, says Liliana Di Nola-Baron at Panitch Schwarze.

• How Courts Are Addressing The Use Of AI In Discovery

  

  In recent months, several courts have issued opinions on handling discovery issues involving artificial intelligence, which collectively offer useful insights on integrating AI into discovery and protecting work product in connection with AI prompts and outputs, says Philip Favro at Favro Law.

• AI Infrastructure Growth Brings Unique IP Considerations

  

  The explosive rise of artificial intelligence has triggered an equally dramatic transformation in the supporting infrastructure required to meet growing AI demand, and the technology used in these data centers has its own intellectual property considerations to navigate, says Vincent Allen at Carstens Allen.

• Series

  Adapting To Private Practice: From ATF Director To BigLaw

  

  As a two-time boomerang partner, returning to BigLaw after stints as a U.S. attorney and the director of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, people ask me how I know when to move on, but there’s no single answer — just clearly set your priorities, says Steven Dettelbach at BakerHostetler.

• IPR Decisions Clarify Stewart's 'Settled Expectations' Factor

  

  Recent discretionary denial decisions from U.S. Patent and Trademark Office acting Director Coke Morgan Stewart have begun to illuminate the contours of her "settled expectations" doctrine, informing when it might be worth petitioning for inter partes review if the patent at issue has been in force for a few years, say attorneys at Morgan Lewis.

• How To Increase 3rd-Party Preissuance Patent Submissions

  

  Attorneys Marian Underweiser and Marc Ehrlich, who helped draft the America Invents Act, discuss changes that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office could potentially implement to facilitate its hopes for increased participation in front-end patent challenges.

• Anthropic Ruling Creates Fair Use Framework For AI Training

  

  A California federal court’s recent ruling that Anthropic’s use of copyrighted books to train its large language model qualified as fair use provides important guidance for both artificial intelligence developers and copyright holders because it distinguishes between transformative uses and unauthorized uses involving pirated or format-shifted works, say attorneys at Ropes & Gray.

• Series

  Playing Baseball Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Playing baseball in college, and now Wiffle ball in a local league, has taught me that teamwork, mental endurance and emotional intelligence are not only important to success in the sport, but also to success as a trial attorney, says Kevan Dorsey at Swift Currie.

• Assessing Impact Of USPTO's New Patent Policies

  

  Recent data shows how the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's new patent policies are affecting America Invents Act trial institution rates, including spurring an uptick in discretionary denials, say attorneys at Armond Wilson.

• Series

  Law School's Missed Lessons: Skillful Persuasion

  

  In many ways, law school teaches us how to argue, but when the ultimate goal is to get your client what they want, being persuasive through preparation and humility is the more likely key to success, says Michael Friedland at Friedland Cianfrani.

• Fed. Circ. Ingenico Ruling Pivotal For IPR Estoppel Landscape

  

  The Federal Circuit's recent decision in Ingenico v. Ioengine brings long-awaited clarity to the scope of inter partes review estoppel, confirming that a patent challenger is not precluded from relying on the same or substantially similar prior art in both IPR and district court proceedings, so long as it is used to support a different invalidity theory, say attorneys at Irwin IP.

• Litigation Inspiration: How To Respond After A Loss

  

  Every litigator loses a case now and then, and the sting of that loss can become a medicine that strengthens or a poison that corrodes, depending on how the attorney responds, says Bennett Rawicki at Hilgers Graben.

• How Patent Attys Can Carefully Integrate LLMs Into Workflows

  

  With artificial intelligence-powered tools now being developed specifically for the intellectual property domain, patent practitioners should monitor evolving considerations to ensure that their capabilities are enhanced — rather than diminished — by these resources, say attorneys at McDonnell Boehnen.

• The Metamorphosis Of The Major Questions Doctrine

  

  The so-called major questions doctrine arose as a counterweight to Chevron deference over the past few decades, but invocations of the doctrine have persisted in the year since Chevron was overturned, suggesting it still has a role to play in reining in agency overreach, say attorneys at Crowell & Moring.

• New PTAB Denial Processes Grow More And More Confusing

  

  Guidance from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office about the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's new workload management and discretionary denial processes has been murky and inconsistent, and has been further muddled by the acting director's seemingly contradictory decisions, say attorneys at Finnegan.