On February 13, 2024, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued guidance regarding the determination of “inventorship” with respect to artificial-intelligence-assisted inventions. This guidance, explained in detail here, is important information for inventors relying on artificial intelligence in the creation of their inventions. These guidelines explain that “while AI-assisted inventions are not categorically unpatentable, the inventorship analysis should focus on human contributions, as patents function to incentivize and reward human ingenuity.” The chief takeaways could be summarized as follows: If you are using — or considering using — artificial intelligence in the invention process, it is important to know your…
Quinn IP Law News and Insights
Stay up to date on all the latest Quinn IP Law news and events.
At Quinn IP Law, we take pride in our reputation as a forward-thinking law intellectual property law firm focused on impeccable quality over billable hours. We constantly strive to improve our practice and make positive and insightful contributions to our field. From thought leadership to community service, you can learn about our team’s most recent work and achievements here.
The Novice Tries AI: A Cautionary Tale
Underscoring the Importance of Human Expert Oversight When Using Artificial Intelligence Tools Like many, I’ve been intrigued by the future prospect of artificial intelligence, including its applications specifically in the practice of IP law. But like others, I remain equally cautious in its adoption as a replacement for experienced and expert humans in certain aspects of the application of legal work. A recent exercise in exploring both the prospects and potential limitations of AI illustrates and illuminates both sides of the aisle — the intrigued and the intrepid. While queries were addressed nearly instantaneously, including the research of relevant case…
How “The Enablement Requirement” Limits Some Inventors but Empowers Others
In May of 2023, the Supreme Court delivered a unanimous ruling that effectively states, “the more one claims, the more one must enable.” The decision was long-awaited by patent practitioners. The ruling was delivered by Justice Gorsuch in Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, 22-157, — U.S. — (2023) (21-757_k5g1), and has notable takeaways for inventors filing functional patent claims. The case pertains to patents covering antibodies engineered by scientists that help reduce levels of low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol. LDL cholesterol is also known as “bad cholesterol,” as it can lead to cardiovascular disease, heart attacks, and strokes. These antibodies inhibit the operation of…