Hunter, Rose Published in Intellectual Property Magazine About Overcoming Challenges to Patent Eligibility
16 July 2020
Intellectual Property Magazine
Partner Paul Hunter and Senior Counsel Daniel Rose were published in Intellectual Property Magazine. Their article, “Moving Target,” discussed approaches to overcoming challenges to patent eligibility in light of recent jurisprudence and inconsistent policy.
“Patent eligibility defines what can be patented. Over the past decade, the standard for such eligibility in the US has been a moving target with courts and the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) lacking a consistent voice. Only recently have jurisprudence and the USPTO found similar approaches to assessing eligibility,” they wrote.
“After four decisions on patent subject matter eligibility in the early 2010s – Bilski, Mayo, Myriad, and Alice – the Supreme Court of the US has sat on the sidelines and let the Federal Circuit and the USPTO hash out the details of this developing area of law. The Justices have declined to hear any eligibility questions this term, even rejecting an appeal from the Federal Circuit’s en banc denial for rehearing in Athena v Mayo this past summer that resulted in nine separate opinions. Lower courts and the USPTO have struggled with confusing and inconsistent precedent, resulting in a lack of clarity and predictability.”
Read the full article here.
(Subscription required)
“Patent eligibility defines what can be patented. Over the past decade, the standard for such eligibility in the US has been a moving target with courts and the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) lacking a consistent voice. Only recently have jurisprudence and the USPTO found similar approaches to assessing eligibility,” they wrote.
“After four decisions on patent subject matter eligibility in the early 2010s – Bilski, Mayo, Myriad, and Alice – the Supreme Court of the US has sat on the sidelines and let the Federal Circuit and the USPTO hash out the details of this developing area of law. The Justices have declined to hear any eligibility questions this term, even rejecting an appeal from the Federal Circuit’s en banc denial for rehearing in Athena v Mayo this past summer that resulted in nine separate opinions. Lower courts and the USPTO have struggled with confusing and inconsistent precedent, resulting in a lack of clarity and predictability.”
Read the full article here.
(Subscription required)
People
Related News
04 October 2024
In the News
Rajiv Dharnidharka and Jeanette Barzelay Featured Across Legal Press for Move to Foley
Recent laterals Rajiv Dharnidharka and Jeanette Barzelay are featured across legal press for their arrival to Foley, including in the Law360 article, "Foley Adds 2 DLA Piper Business Litigators In San Francisco."
04 October 2024
In the News
Chanley Howell on AI IP Protection in Litigation – 'Judges are human'
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Chanley Howell shared insight on protecting the intellectual property behind emerging technologies like artificial intelligence in the Bloomberg Law article, "AI Put on Trial in ‘Life or Death’ Police Tech Clashes."
01 October 2024
In the News
Natasha Allen on DEI Challenges for Corporate Boards – 'Diversity is necessary for companies to succeed'
Foley & Lardner LLP partner Natasha Allen authored the article, "Navigating Today's DEI Challenges," in the November/December issue of Corporate Governance Advisor.