Less than two weeks after Judge Pauline Newman filed her reply brief with the U.S. Supreme Court in response to the May 12 opposition brief filed by U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) Chief Judge Kimberly Moore, the Court has today denied Newman’s petition for certiorari. Newman filed her Supreme Court petition in March of this year.

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) announced late Monday that it is designating as informative a decision based in part on USPTO Director John Squires’ recent memo outlining additional discretionary denial factors the Office will consider with respect to institution of inter partes review (IPR) and post grant review (PGR) proceedings. Specifically, the decision found that Tesla, Inc.’s evidence of manufacturing activities in the United States, “including that it manufactures the accused products in America,” favored a finding that discretionary denial is not appropriate.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) issued a decision today in Medmix Switzerland AG v. Squires, affirming a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) final written decision that found several claims of a Medmix fluid-mixing patent unpatentable as obvious. The decision upholds the Board’s construction of a disputed claim term and its finding that a skilled artisan would have been motivated to combine the prior art references at issue.

A full-time, fully remote role is available at Thompson Patent Law for an experienced Patent Agent. TPL understands that many attorneys are looking for more – a greater challenge, consistent workflow, a meaningful culture, and real opportunities to grow – and offers a steady flow of high-quality patent work, a full-time remote role supported by strong systems, a respectful, values-driven culture, and direct mentorship from Craige Thompson, JD, MBA, EE, PE, Managing Principal Patent Attorney and #1 Amazon best-selling author of Patent Offense.

The United States is the only country in the world where the judiciary forces patent term truncation over unrelated patent families. In Europe, China, and most other nations, the patent laws provide a “novelty only” standard for patent applications filed before the publication of a different earlier filed patent application, and a “novelty and inventive step” standard for patent applications filed after the publication of an earlier filed patent application. The law in virtually every country outside the United States works well using this framework.

Gilbert Hyatt is a prolific independent inventor known for his large number of patent applications held up for decades at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and the courts. In its decisions in Hyatt v. Hirshfeld, 998 F. 3d 1347 (Fed. Cir. 2021) (Hyatt I) and Hyatt v. Stewart, 148 F. 4th 1376 (Fed. Cir. 2025) (Hyatt II), the Federal Circuit held that he forfeited his patent rights under the prosecution laches doctrine

This week in Other Barks & Bites: Senators Chuck Grassley and Amy Klobuchar introduced the American Innovation and Choice Online Act into Congress; the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office waived the petition fee for the Streamlined Claim Set pilot program; the Council for Innovation Promotion publishes a study on the impacts of intellectual property rights in cultivating technology ecosystems;

Many of us have spent our careers defending and promoting our patent system and related policies like the Bayh-Dole Act, which injected the authorities and incentives of patent ownership into the federal R&D system so that resulting discoveries would no longer waste away on the shelves, benefitting no one. While we usually focus on statistics, legal analysis and case studies, sometimes the impact of what we’re doing hits you square in the face. Last week, I was fortunate enough to have that happen and it’s an experience I’ll never forget.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Thursday affirmed a district court’s order dismissing a claim of patent infringement brought by Dynapass against Bank of America. Chief Judge Moore authored the opinion. Dynapass claimed Bank of America Corporation and Bank of America, N.A. (BOA) infringed its U.S. Patent No. 6,993,658, which covers a user authentication system in which user tokens are supplied through communication devices. Dynapass claimed Bank of America’s two-factor authentication feature of BOA’s Mobile Banking Application infringed claims 1–7 of the ’658 patent and sued Bank of America in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

U.S. House Republicans recently introduced legislation that would prohibit entities on federal national security watchlists from receiving or enforcing U.S. patents. The Council for Innovation Promotion (C4IP) responded with a statement urging Congress to reconsider the bill. The legislation would prohibit the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) from issuing patents to individuals or entities identified as Chinese military-affiliated organizations.

IPWatchdog’s 2026 Patent Masters Program kicked off Monday with discussions on the state of the international patent landscape and the role of artificial intelligence (AI) in creating efficiency gains in patent prosecution and portfolio building, before moving into conversations on Tuesday and Wednesday about monetization, ex parte appeal strategies and how to shape the future of the U.S patent system, among other topics.

At a recent Senate Judiciary Subcommittee hearing, Register of Copyrights Shira Perlmutter noted that Congress may need to overturn this year’s unanimous decision in the Cox v. Sony Supreme Court case or create a new “site blocking” regime to force internet service providers (ISPs) to block access to certain internet sites. The only problem? To put it bluntly, she is wrong.

On Monday, an arbitrator issued an order finding that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) violated federal labor law when it eliminated routine and remote telework for non-Patents bargaining unit employees represented by the Patent Office Professional Association (POPA) without first engaging in impact and implementation bargaining.

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) on Tuesday reversed and remanded two Patent Trial and Appeal Board decisions that had found Google’s patents for improvements to “hotword” detection unpatentable. The opinion was authored by CAFC Chief Judge Moore. “Hotwords” are phrases like “Hey Siri” and “OK Computer” that are used to activate voice assistants. Google’s U.S. patents 10,134,398 and 10,593,330 are directed to improvements that “address the problem of triggering multiple devices with a single hotword” by suppressing the reaction in other devices while the intended device reacts.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I spoke with Rama Elluru, a former PTAB Judge turned national security policy advisor. We explore the accelerating intersection of AI, patent law, and national competitiveness, as well as the hard questions policymakers will soon face around AI-assisted inventorship, patent eligibility, drug discovery, scientific research, and whether existing legal frameworks can keep pace with technologies that are advancing far faster than Congress, agencies, and courts typically move. We also address the broader national security implications of intellectual property policy, AI-enabled fraud, workforce disruption, the need for guardrails and meaningful penalties for malicious uses of AI, and why IP must be understood as a core pillar of economic and national security strategy.