Posts Tagged: "Juristat"

Corporate mandates to cut legal spend are accelerating. And many teams are responding the same way. Buy an AI tool. Deploy it fast. Expect savings. But “AI-first” doesn’t automatically mean “savings-first.” AI is only as good as the data behind it, and while automation can accelerate review and surface issues, it isn’t responsible or accountable for outcomes; that accountability stays…

Kick off 2026 with a closer look at what’s new—and what’s next—at Juristat. Join us on January 28, at 12:30 p.m. ET, for New Year, New Juristat, a live walkthrough of the most impactful enhancements introduced over the past year, along with a look at how Juristat continues to evolve to support smarter, faster IP decisions. In this session, we’ll…

When time is limited and resources are finite, guessing your way through business development isn’t an option. Patent firms often rely on referrals or instinct to pursue new business. But in a crowded market where clients expect data-driven pitches, and RFPs move fast, you can’t afford guesswork. To stay competitive in a commoditized space, firms need a faster and more…

Generative AI tools like ChatGPT have captured the world’s attention. They can summarize documents, draft text, and answer questions in seconds. But in the highly specialized world of patent law, “good enough” is not good enough. Complex statutes, procedural rules, and nuanced drafting conventions require expertise that most public AI models simply don’t have. Relying on them in a high-stakes…

Strained budgets. Rising expectations. Fragmented prosecution strategies. Corporate IP teams are under pressure to control costs and improve outcomes. Outside counsel must show value and adapt to each client’s goals. However, without shared data and clear policies, collaboration often breaks down. Join us on Wednesday, May 14, at 12:30 p.m. EST / 9:30 a.m. PST, for “The New IP Playbook:…

You know what they say, “New year, new… Juristat features!” Join us on Wednesday, January 15, at 12:30 p.m. EST / 9:30 a.m. PST, for “New Year, New Juristat.” We’ll introduce our newest features and preview some exciting updates coming later in the year. This webinar is our most popular every year, so don’t miss it! What to expect: A…

Taking a hint from what has worked before can give patent prosecutors an advantage. The question is then how to find such examples for use in forming arguments and claim amendments to address Alice v. CLS Bank rejections…. If you happen to face an Alice v. CLS Bank rejection or are sorted into an art unit that experiences a high volume of Alice v. CLS Bank rejections, consulting the prosecution history of successful cases in Public PAIR can prove fruitful for identifying analogous claim limitations and arguments that may help stimulate your thinking in forming a successful strategy for patentability.

Several questions every patent attorney should be asking before responding to an Alice rejection are: (1) How many Alice rejections has the examiner issued? (2) What does he or she consider to be the sticking points of the decision? (3) How many applications that received an Alice rejection were eventually allowed? Once an attorney has the answers to these questions in hand, the path to success in responding to an Alice rejection is considerably clearer.