Posts in IP News

To compete in artificial intelligence (AI) markets, emerging companies must choose one of two routes: the capital-intensive route entails buying compute and datasets to build in-house foundation models and refining them into agents for specific use cases. Alternatively, emergents can license pre-trained models and lease compute to focus on developing applications for the end user, whether that is a solo software developer or an entire business domain.

Bayes PLLC is looking for a Patent Preparation and Prosecution Attorney or Agent who wants more than a job. Bayes offers direct access to technically rich work, flexible scheduling, and a close-knit team environment where your contributions actually matter. At Bayes, you will draft and prosecute patent applications across some of the most exciting technology spaces today: semiconductors, AI, telecommunications, medical devices, consumer electronics, and renewable energy. As you grow, you will have the opportunity to expand into invalidity proceedings, patent litigation support, and IP due diligence. This is a full-time or part-time, hybrid position.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) today issued a precedential opinion authored by Judge Chen that clarified its case law on statutory versus constitutional standing analyses. The decision ultimately reversed and remanded a district court ruling that had dismissed a plaintiff’s patent infringement suit for lack of constitutional standing.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Recor Medical, Inc. v. Medtronic Ireland Manufacturing Unlimited Co., reversing a ruling from the United States District Court for the Northern District of California and holding that Medtronic Ireland Manufacturing Unlimited Co. retained sufficient exclusionary rights to satisfy Article III constitutional standing, even after licensing certain patent rights to an affiliated entity. The ruling came after a precedential opinion issued today on the same topic.

Today, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an order list showing that the nation’s highest court had denied a series of petitions for writ of certiorari filed by major pharmaceutical developers to challenge the Medicare negotiation program established by the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). The Supreme Court also denied cert to an appeal of Section 101 patent-eligibility issues from a Federal Circuit ruling involving mobile banking technology, as well as a pro se cert appealing copyright and intentional infliction of emotional distress (IIED) against Disney.

On Thursday, May 14, U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) Director John Squires issued a Director Discretionary Decision in which he denied institution of an inter partes review (IPR) petition and marked the opinion precedential, underscoring six key principles that should guide whether the Office institutes America invents Act (AIA) proceedings.

On May 15, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential ruling in mCom IP, LLC v. City National Bank of Florida affirming the Southern District of Florida’s dismissal of patent owner mCom IP’s complaint after finding the asserted patent claims obvious on the same grounds as related patent claims invalidated at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). However, the Federal Circuit found that the district court improperly concluded that the case was exceptional, leading the appellate court to reverse the attorney’s fee award and attorney sanctions after finding the plaintiff did not develop evidence of frivolous litigation conduct.

This week in Other Barks & Bites: the Legislative Branch Agencies Clarification Act moves one step closer toward enactment; the Federal Circuit reverses attorney’s fees award and attorney sanctions in a patent case over e-banking technology; the Court of Justice for the European Union finds that a publisher’s right to fair compensation established by EU member states is permissible if qualifying as consideration for the right to republish; Nokia earns a stay of UK court rulings in its RAND licensing battle over video codec patents with Acer and Asus; the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office places informative designations on a trio of Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions applying agency precedent on inconsistent claim construction positions; Cisco announces 4,000 layoffs on the same day that it reported a 12% year-over-year jump in quarterly revenues; top Congressional Democrats publicly opposed President Trump’s ouster of the National Science Board membership; and the European General Court tells the European Union Intellectual Property Office that it did not sufficiently analyze links between an ammunition trademark and a famous French comic serial.

To say we live in perplexing times is an understatement. Everything seems to be shifting beneath our feet, often with seemingly little thought. One example is the move to change how the federal government supports research. It wasn’t until the passage of the Bayh-Dole Act in 1980, which injected the incentives of patent ownership into the system, that the situation changed. And the result was dramatic.

When the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a new, easier-to-administer version of a popular cancer medicine called Keytruda a few months ago, patients celebrated. But critics quickly cried foul, accusing the drug’s manufacturer of gaming the patent system to preserve its monopoly and prevent cheaper competitors from coming to market. 

Gerasimow Law is seeking an Associate Attorney to provide core support to a Partner and Senior Associate across a diverse intellectual property docket. This role offers direct involvement in the technical and legal life cycle of a case, from initial filing through post-grant challenges. This position is fully remote with no in-office requirement. Candidates located in Illinois or Texas are a plus.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision today affirming a district court ruling that Mylan Pharmaceuticals’ generic hypertension drug did not literally infringe Actelion Pharmaceuticals’ U.S. patents for its own hypertension drug, Veletri®. The CAFC also affirmed the district court’s holding that Actelion had not proven and was barred from asserting infringement by an equivalent.

Yesterday, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office published a trademark alert highlighting actions that the agency has taken recently to remove fraudulent and otherwise invalid marks from the federal trademark register. In 11 administrative orders issued by the USPTO since the beginning of last October, the agency has either invalidated or is targeting for invalidation around 10,500 trademark applications and registrations for reasons including forged attorney signatures and inventing non-existent trademark registration requirements and fees.

During a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property hearing on the Oversight of the U.S. Copyright Office on Tuesday, the intersection of copyright law, artificial intelligence, and executive branch interference were the key focuses. Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter provided critical updates on the Copyright Office’s modernization efforts. However, the hearing was punctuated by sharp rebukes from Democratic senators regarding former President Donald Trump’s recent attempts to assert executive control over the legislative branch agency.