Expert Analysis

• Opinion

  USPTO Must Address The Right Question In Sanofi Case

  

  The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Appeals Review Panel's questions in Ex parte Baurin indicate recognition of broader doctrinal issues, but rather than approaching from separate angles, the panel should concentrate on a single fundamental question about obviousness-type double patenting, says Jeremy Lowe at Spencer Fane.

• 4 Emerging Approaches To AI Protective Order Language

  

  Over the last year, at least five federal district courts have issued or analyzed specific protective order provisions restricting the use of generative artificial intelligence platforms with protected materials, establishing that proactive AI-specific provisions are now standard practice and demonstrating that no single model works for every case, says Joel Bush at Kilpatrick.

• What Justices Are Focusing On In 'Skinny Label' Patent Case

  

  Though Hikma v. Amarin appears to be a patent dispute that could reshape inducement doctrine in the pharmaceutical context, oral argument suggests the U.S. Supreme Court may treat this as primarily a pleading-stage dispute, with important unresolved questions lurking beneath the surface, says Shashank Upadhye at Upadhye Tang.

• Heppner Ruling Left AI Privilege Risk For Lawyers Unresolved

  

  While a New York federal judge’s recent ruling in U.S. v. Heppner resolved a privilege question surrounding client-side artificial intelligence use, it did not address how to mitigate the risks that can arise when confidential information enters the operative context of an AI system used by an attorney, says Jianfei Chen at Quarles & Brady​​​​​​​.

• How 10 Years Of Case Law Have Shaped The DTSA

  

  As the Defend Trade Secrets Act reaches its 10th anniversary, attorneys at Ropes & Gray examine recent DTSA case law and highlight key takeaways regarding pleading requirements, damages and risk factors.

• The Ethics And Practicalities Of Representing AI Agents

  

  With autonomous artificial intelligence agents now able to take action without explicit instructions from — or the awareness of — their human owners, the bar must confront whether existing frameworks like informed consent and client privilege will be sufficient on the day an AI agent calls seeking counsel, say attorneys at Morrison Cohen.

• Series

  Speed Jigsaw Puzzling Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  My passion for speed puzzling — I can complete a 500-piece jigsaw puzzle in under 50 minutes — has sharpened my legal skills in more ways than one, with both disciplines requiring patience, precision and the ability to keep the bigger picture in mind while working through the details, says Tazia Statucki at Proskauer.

• Rebuttal

  Pro Codes Act Does Not Pose Constitutional Concerns

  

  A recent Law360 guest article that raises constitutional alarms concerning the proposed Pro Codes Act, under consideration in the U.S. House of Representatives, overstates the potential harm to standards development organizations and mischaracterizes existing law, says James Gourley at Carstens Allen.

• High Court's Cox Ruling Leaves ISP Copyright Rules Intact

  

  Though some commentators predicted a cataclysmic impact from the U.S. Supreme Court's recent decision in Cox v. Sony, in actuality the decision correctly maintains the status quo for internet providers' copyright infringement liability, says Courtney Sarnow at CM Law.

• Building Codes Ruling May Inform AI Copyright Arguments

  

  The Third Circuit's recent decision in ASTM v. UpCodes, finding that republication of copyrighted building codes incorporated into binding law likely constitutes fair use, may help shape intellectual property strategy for standards organizations, rights holders and potentially even AI stakeholders, says Mitesh Patel at Reed Smith.

• DOJ's Stance On Antitrust And Patent Law Reflects Balance

  

  Recent statements of interest in patent litigation and a speech from a key U.S. Department of Justice official communicate the view that strong patent rights and competition policy are complementary, and offer important guidance for intellectual property practitioners and businesses navigating patent enforcement, standard‑setting and licensing, say attorneys at Wiley.

• 2 AI Snafus Show Why Attys Can't Outsource Judgment

  

  The recent incident involving Sullivan & Cromwell where citations in a filed motion were fabricated by artificial intelligence, as well as a punitive ruling from the Sixth Circuit in U.S. v. Farris, demonstrate that the obligation to supervise AI has belonged and always will belong to lawyers, says John Powell at the Kentucky School Boards Association.

• Opinion

  Congress Must Repair USPTO's Inter Partes Review Process

  

  To challenge recent changes to the inter partes review process issued by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, Congress must establish clear statutory guardrails, transparency and meaningful judicial review so that questionable patents receive proper scrutiny, say Sean Tu at the University of Alabama, Arti Rai at Duke University and Aaron Kesselheim at Harvard.

• Series

  Playing Magic: The Gathering Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  The competitive card game Magic: The Gathering offers me a training ground for the strategic thinking skills crucial to litigation, challenging me to adapt to oft-updated rules, analyze text as complicated as any statute and anticipate my opponent’s next moves, says Christopher Smith at Lash Goldberg.

• Fed. Circ. In March: IPR And The Limits Of Retroactivity

  

  The Federal Circuit recently ruled in Implicit v. Sonos that even though the clever retroactive correction of two invalidated patents theoretically should have changed the outcome of the inter partes review, the patentee had forfeited the right to rely on the correction — which is interesting for several reasons, say attorneys at Knobbe Martens.