Here is a report on recent news and commentary related to the Federal Circuit and its cases. Today we highlight:
- an article describing how “the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is going all-in on generative artificial intelligence solutions to help improve its business operations”;
- a piece examining a recent precedential Federal Circuit holding that “inter partes review estoppel does not extend to arguments that the claimed invention is invalid because it was known or used by others, on sale, or in public use”; and
- an article discussing how “[t]housands of disabled veterans could be eligible for additional retroactive combat-related special compensation after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled last week that federal officials had unfairly capped those payments.”
Alexandra Kelley wrote an article for Nextgov describing how “the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office is going all-in on generative artificial intelligence solutions to help improve its business operations.” According to Kelley, “[o]fficials from USPTO hosted a Tuesday discussion on the agency’s future leveraging AI for its various missions, the comments it’s looking for on its recent request for information on available automated offerings[,] and the solutions the agency is currently developing.” Additionally, Kelley discussed how, “[m]oving forward, the agency is looking to continue acquiring more AI tools and solutions to assist patent examiners and trademark examining attorneys, as well as reduce the overall wait times in the trademark process.”
Andrew Zappia, Bryan Smith, and Nicholas Gallo penned a piece for Law360 examining a recent precedential Federal Circuit holding that “inter partes review estoppel does not extend to arguments that the claimed invention is invalid because it was known or used by others, on sale, or in public use.” The authors for this piece suggested that, because “[t]his holding limits the scope of IPR estoppel,” it “may encourage more petitioners to utilize the IPR mechanism to challenge patents.” The authors also noted how this decision “comes at a time when the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has altered its standards on discretionary denials of IPR petitions in order to manage current Patent Trial and Appeal Board workloads and avoid overburdening the office.” For more information, check out the relevant opinion in Ingenico Inc. v. IOENGINE LLC.
Leo Shane III wrote an article for MilitaryTimes discussing how “[t]housands of disabled veterans could be eligible for additional retroactive combat-related special compensation after the Supreme Court unanimously ruled last week that federal officials had unfairly capped those payments.” Shane described how this case “has been winding through the federal courts since 2017 and has been pending before the Supreme Court since last fall.” Shane III discussed how “[o]fficials from the National Veterans Legal Services Program, which helped bring the legal suit, said more than 9,000 individuals nationwide could benefit from the ruling.” For more information, check out our case page in Soto v. United States.