In The Legal’s Intellectual Property supplement, read about how government shutdowns affect IP rights, patent litigation in the cannabis industry and infringement issues in artificial intelligence patents.
Thanks to recent decisions by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), we have clarity that both requirements must be met to appeal an adverse final written decision issued during that IPR, and we also have some guidance as to how these requirements will be determined in such cases.
Damage assessments of the partial government shutdown, the longest in U.S. history, place the cost of the government shutdown to the U.S. economy between $6 billion and $11 billion. Although the threat of another shutdown seems to have passed for now, speculation continues to abound as to what catastrophes await in the event of another government shutdown.
Law students are taught that one purpose served by the civil legal system is to provide predictability in business. For the cannabis industry, predictability remains a work in progress in view of conflicting federal and state laws and regulations.
For pharmaceutical inventions, which usually undergo a lengthy FDA approval process before any drug can be sold, the most valuable portion of patent term is at the end of the patent’s life, after FDA approval.
Artificial intelligence (AI), also referred to as machine-learning technology, refers to software that applies data to incrementally improve its functionality and output.
In this article, we briefly review the doctrine of inherency, in the context of an obviousness rejection, as a bar to patentability.
You go to a restaurant and order apple pie. It’s the best apple pie you’ve ever eaten. You want the recipe. You can either ask for it or reverse engineer it. So far so good. But what if you wanted to make an apple pie that was even better? Knowing the recipe will only take you so far. What would really help is knowing what didn’t work.