The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Biofer S.p.A. v. Vifor (International) AG affirming a judgment of non-infringement by the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of New York in favor of Swiss Pharmaceutical company, Vifor (International) AG. The dispute centered on the construction of a claimed pH range recited in a patent covering a process for producing iron-sugar complexes used to treat iron deficiency.

Yesterday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued a ruling in Vieth v. MOM Enterprises, LLC affirming the Patent Trial and Appeal Board’s (PTAB) invalidation of Elaine and Dr. Reinhold Veith’s patent claims to methods of administering vitamin D to human beings. The Federal Circuit agreed that most of the claim construction and prior art arguments raised by the Vieths on appeal were forfeited for not being properly developed in the proceedings below, and also dismissed the Vieths’ contentions that they had established nexus between industry praise for its products and the challenged method claims.

On September 1, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed a Statement of Interest urging the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York to hold that using copyrighted written works to train large language models (LLMs) is fair use, arguing that a contrary result would distort copyright law, suppress innovation and weaken U.S. competitiveness and national security. The statement was filed in reference to the multidistrict copyright litigation against OpenAI, although it specifically addressed claims by The New York Times and said its reasoning also applies to the related cases involving book authors and publishers.

The House Judiciary Committee’s Subcommittee on Courts, Intellectual Property, Artificial Intelligence, and the Internet held an oversight hearing today to consider its role in renewing the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office’s (USPTO’s) fee setting authority. Throughout the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman Darrel Issa (R-CA) expressed skepticism about USPTO Director John Squires’ recent changes to discretionary denial practice at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) and wondered whether renewal of such authority under the America Invents Act (AIA) should be conditioned on reforms to the agency’s policy.

Many Worlds 2T Innovations LLC has filed a patent infringement lawsuit against OpenAI OpCo, LLC, alleging that OpenAI’s artificial intelligence products and services infringe five AI patents covering personalized search, vector-based retrieval, recommendation systems and probabilistically controlled content generation. The complaint, filed August 31, 2026, in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division, seeks a jury trial, monetary damages in the form of past and continuing royalties, enhanced damages for alleged willful infringement, and an injunction prohibiting continued infringement.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision today in Netlist, Inc. v. Micron Technology, Inc., affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) final written decision that found all challenged claims of a Netlist computer memory patent unpatentable as obvious. The court rejected Netlist’s arguments that the Board’s findings lacked substantial evidentiary support and that the Board violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) in reaching its conclusions.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I spoke with Bijou Mgbojikwe, who serves as Senior Policy Counsel for the Entertainment Software Association. Our conversation examined the rapidly expanding intersection of artificial intelligence, intellectual property, and video game policy. The central challenge is that legislation often treats very different technologies and use cases as though they present the same risks. Mgbojikwe discussed the distinction between harmful deepfakes and digital replicas used in legitimate creative works, including films and video games. Those concepts can implicate different legal frameworks, including right-of-publicity laws, copyright, consumer-protection statutes, and the First Amendment. When lawmakers combine them through broad definitions that are intended to prevent fraud, for example, legislation aimed at deception or abuse can inadvertently reach fictional characters, realistic game environments, and other expressive content.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision on Monday in Exelixis, Inc. v. MSN Laboratories Private Ltd., affirming a district court finding that certain patent claims covering a cancer treatment satisfy the written description requirement under 35 U.S.C. Section 112(a). The court also granted a motion to dismiss a separate portion of the appeal as moot and vacated the underlying district court judgment on that issue.

Former U.S. District Judge Alan D. Albright of the Western District of Texas has returned to private practice as a partner in A&O Shearman’s IP litigation practice as of today. Albright announced in April that he would leave the Western Texas bench by the end of August. Nominated to the federal judiciary during the first Trump Administration, Judge Albright earned a reputation of thoughtfulness and fairness in the application of patent law among plaintiff- and defendant-side lawyers arguing in his courtroom

TTI Consumer Power Tools, Inc., is seeking to fill an in-house Intellectual Property Counsel position located at its Anderson, South Carolina office. TTI CPT is a global leader in quality consumer and professional power tools and outdoor products, designing and developing products under brands including RYOBI and RIDGID. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Monday handed SpaceTime3D, Inc. mixed results in two nonprecedential decisions involving graphical user interface patents challenged by Apple Inc. and Google LLC, with the outcomes turning largely on differences in the wording of related claims. In Apple Inc., Google LLC  v. SpaceTime3D, Inc., the court affirmed a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision upholding claims 1-13 of U.S. Patent No. 8,881,048 but finding claims 14-18 obvious. In a separate appeal, SpaceTime3D, Inc. v. Apple Inc., Google LLC, the CAFC affirmed the Board’s determination that all challenged claims of U.S. Patent Nos. 9,304,654 and 9,696,868 were obvious.

On Friday, an amicus brief was filed at the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of major trade associations in the computer software, automotive, retail and other industries, urging the Court to grant Tesla’s petition for writ of certiorari following the denial of its petitions for inter partes review (IPR) at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) challenging patent claims owned by self-driving technology company Granite Vehicle Ventures. The industry groups claim that the Court’s review is necessary to address so-called “patent trolls” and policies adopted by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) that effectively eliminate the use of IPRs to combat these allegedly bad actors.

On Friday, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) affirmed a district court’s decision to dismiss a patent infringement suit on both improper venue and patent ineligibility grounds, holding that the district court was not required to stop its analysis after determining the venue was improper. The opinion was authored by Judge Prost.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a precedential decision Friday that it lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal filed by T-Mobile US, Inc. and T-Mobile USA, Inc. against KAIFI LLC arising from a dispute over a patent settlement agreement, transferring the case to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. In T-Mobile US, Inc. v. KAIFI LLC, Circuit Judge Chen authored the opinion for a panel that included Circuit Judges Taranto and Schall, concluding that the underlying disagreement over settlement contract language did not necessarily raise a substantial question of patent law.

Brazil is one of the world’s largest economies and one of the most important markets for companies seeking expansion in Latin America. However, many foreign applicants quickly discover that success before the Brazilian Patent and Trademark Office (the Instituto Nacional da Propriedade Industrial – INPI) requires more than simply filing an application. The Brazilian system combines procedural formalities, relatively long examination timelines, unique legal requirements, and several acceleration opportunities that are often overlooked by foreign applicants. Understanding these practical aspects can help businesses avoid unnecessary delays, reduce costs, and build stronger intellectual property portfolios.