Posts Tagged: "Gene Quinn"

In this week’s episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, I speak with Megan Carpenter, who just recently stepped down as Dean of UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law after more than eight years. Our conversation was part personal journey and business philosophy together with a candid assessment of the IP ecosystem. We tackle emerging issues, including AI’s impact on legal practice and education. And we discuss the role of IP as essential to sustaining innovation in a rapidly evolving global economy, and fostering human creativity, innovation, and economic mobility.

In the latest episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, I sat down with my good friends Brad Close, who is the Executive Vice President of Transpacific IP, and Jim Carmichael, a former judge on the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences and founder of Carmichael IP. Brad, Jim and I engaged in a candid conversation that provides our unvarnished assessment of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), where it started historically, where it is today, and where it may finally be headed. Bottom line: the PTAB is no longer the automatic execution squad it once was, but durable patent rights will require reform well beyond the agency level.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I sat down with prolific inventor Gil Hyatt, exploring his innovative journey and aspirations to leave a lasting legacy. One of the key highlights of the conversation was Gil’s creation of a non-profit Pioneering AI Foundation, which is aimed at advancing AI technology and bolstering U.S. economic interests. This non-profit organization is set to hold Gil’s substantial portfolio of AI patent applications, which cover his pioneering work dating back to the 1980s, and includes groundbreaking claims in artificial intelligence that could revolutionize sectors like education, manufacturing, and trade.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I sat down with my business and life partner, Renee Quinn. In addition to telling Renee’s story about how she found her way into the intellectual property world, and through our sometimes-comical banter, we together explore what it really takes to build, sustain, and continuously reinvent an entrepreneurial company like IPWatchdog. What emerged was a practical roadmap for entrepreneurship, invention, navigating platform risk, and focused on the necessity of constantly being ready to pivot as old business models start to show signs of age and ultimately falter. From Renee’s journey from IP outsider to patented inventor, to firsthand lessons learned navigating Amazon’s reseller ecosystem, the discussion highlights how intellectual property operates in the real world, not the classroom.

As we wind down 2025 it is time to reflect on the year that was, and what the future will bring. This year was punctuated by a structural reset for the U.S. patent system. What unfolded was not just incremental reform, but a coordinated shift driven by leadership change, policy realignment, economic pressure, and accelerating adoption of AI—all converging to reshape how patents are examined, challenged, monetized, and managed. This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we explore the monumental changes and the biggest trends that impacted the patent and innovation industry during 2025, and which will play an important role in defining 2026.

There’s a lot going on at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) right now, and it’s not just the usual noise about discretionary denial. The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has published a one-and-done rules package that, if it survives, would fundamentally change how inter partes review (IPR) challenge works, who can challenge patents, and when. The comment window on the proposed one-and-done rule has now closed. With more than 10,000 comments received by the USPTO and over 700 individual commenters weighing in, the proposed rules package has become a flashpoint for questions that go way beyond discretionary denial and AIA trials, with many asking whether the USPTO is functionally trying to engage in de facto legislation to neuter the PTAB.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, I was joined by my longtime friend John White, who is the the creator of the patent bar review course I’ve taught for almost 27 years. Together we explore the intricate and ever changing patent landscape. First, we begin by discussing the bar exam and how it is changing, then we pivot to the evolving role of AI in patent law more generally. Our conversation traversed decades of personal history, friendship and professional insights, revealing how the industry has transformed over the years and what it means for the current and future generation of patent practitioners.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, we feature a panel discussion that took place on October 27 as a part of our annual life sciences program. Initially styled as a conversation about how artificial intelligence is transforming life sciences, it became quickly apparent that the conversation was not going to be limited to the life sciences sector. Instead the discussion evolved into a robust discussion about data risk and intellectual property, focusing on what every innovative company should have front of mind when considering the adoption of AI tools.

In our latest IPWatchdog Unleashed podcast, I spoke with Rob Sahr, shareholder at Wolf Greenfield and co-chair of our 2025 Life Sciences Masters™ program. Our conversation zeroed in on a hard truth the public rarely sees: moving a molecule from early discovery to an FDA-approved therapy requires a chain of scientific and economic miracles—and every one of them leans on a reliable patent system. In this conversation we discuss the extraordinary journey from molecule to medicine. Together, we explore how scientific breakthroughs depend not only on research and capital, but also on a stable and predictable patent system. From double patenting and government funding to judicial uncertainty and policy headwinds, our conversation dives into the fragile balance between innovation and patent policy—and the many scientific miracles required to bring new drugs to life.

One of the ways judges typically evaluate whether a ruling makes sense is to game out the logical consequences of the ruling to see whether it will lead to absurd results. There is little doubt that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s prosecution laches doctrine isn’t just doctrinally off-base—it leads to absurd results, which makes the doctrine structurally unworkable. The Federal Circuit’s presumption that any patent taking more than six years to prosecute is presumptively unenforceable places the burden on patent owners to demonstrate as a threshold matter that the length of prosecution was reasonable. But the brutal, inconvenient truth is that the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) itself has twice operated secret programs that froze applications for years while telling the outside world nothing.

In our latest IPWatchdog Unleashed podcast, we had a riveting and sometimes emotional conversation that unfolded around one of the most pressing issues in life sciences today: the journey of life-saving drugs from laboratory to patient. We discuss the pivotal role a strong patent system plays in this important journey with guest Sherry Knowles. Sherry is the founder of Knowles Intellectual Property Strategies and former Senior Vice President and Chief Patent Counsel for GlaxoSmithKline. In addition to being one of the leading voices in the life sciences and patent industries, Sherry is also a cancer survivor. Among other things we discuss numerous patent system challenges facing innovator drug companies, the downward pressure generic drugs place on the industry and leading to important drugs becoming unavailable, the role of Pharmacy Benefit Managers (PBMs) with respect to significantly raising the cost of drugs for Americans, and policy influences and legislation on Capitol Hill. Sherry also shares her personal story and insights into why patents are more than just legal constructs—they are deeply personal lifelines.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we tackle the impact of tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty on intellectual property (IP) strategy, budgets and patent portfolios.  In today’s fast-paced global economy, intellectual property (IP) teams face unprecedented challenges and opportunities. The world is witnessing a flux of geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties, and rapid technological advancements, all of which demand agility and strategic foresight from IP professionals. Meanwhile, to complicate matters the United States is attempting to rearrange international business norms by diversifying supply chains for particularly important goods and components, while simultaneously aggressively using tariffs to change global economic behavior and settle international conflicts and wars. There is no doubt that this is a tumultuous time for all businesses, which demands attention, forethought and deliberate strategic action.

This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we tackle the impact of tariffs and geopolitical uncertainty on intellectual property (IP) strategy, budgets and patent portfolios.  In today’s fast-paced global economy, intellectual property (IP) teams face unprecedented challenges and opportunities. The world is witnessing a flux of geopolitical tensions, economic uncertainties, and rapid technological advancements, all of which demand agility and strategic foresight from IP professionals. Meanwhile, to complicate matters the United States is attempting to rearrange international business norms by diversifying supply chains for particularly important goods and components, while simultaneously aggressively using tariffs to change global economic behavior and settle international conflicts and wars. There is no doubt that this is a tumultuous time for all businesses, which demands attention, forethought and deliberate strategic action.

Earlier today the United States filed a Statement of Interest in Radian Memory Systems, LLC v. Samsung Electronics Co. (Civil Action No. 2:24-cv-1073), a patent infringement matter in the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas, Marshall Division. The filing was made by attorneys from both the U.S. Department of Justice, Antitrust Division, and the United States Patent & Trademark Office (USPTO), and suggests that the court should find the existence of irreparable harm to be in favor of the patent owner. Ultimately, the government argument boils down to this: Patent infringement in many cases causes irreparable harm to the patent owner, and monetary damages are extremely difficult to calculate and, therefore, monetary damages are insufficient.