The artificial intelligence (AI) revolution poses new problems for deciding patent eligibility, problems for which the current body of U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit case law and U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) policy is ill-equipped to address. In particular, Alice Step 2, one of the most misunderstood doctrines in all of patent law, has the potential to become even more muddled when considering AI inventions. This is because the case law, as well as examiner practice, have tended to over-emphasize the importance of the conventionality or genericness of computers recited in the claims or described in the specification.
Recent Posts
- The PTAB’s 70% All-Claims Invalidation Rate Continues to Be a Source of Concern
- Novartis’ Entresto Patent Claims Revived by CAFC
- INTA Urges EUIPO Grand Board to Confirm Human Face Marks are Not Excluded from Trademark Registration
- New USPTO Fee Rule for Continuing Applications: Key Changes and Strategic Considerations for Applicants
- AI and the Level of Ordinary Skill: Why Patent Law Must (and Can) Adapt to AI-Augmented Invention