Intellectual Property

New guidance issued by the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) on patent subject matter eligibility under 35 U.S.C. § 101, focusing on AI and other software-related emerging technologies.

In the wake of the Supreme Court’s elimination of “Chevron deference” in the Loper decision, many commentators have suggested that the ITC’s authority over unfair imports under Section 337 might be curtailed.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has issued an important update to its guidance on patent subject matter eligibility.

This case is a victory for public figures and their control over their personal branding. Applicants for trademark registration must continue to get clearance before incurring the significant cost of registration when using a living person’s name. While this decision is likely to have minimal impact on most trademark filings, it does come as part of a larger trend of the Court’s willingness to address longstanding provisions of the Lanham Act. And should Justice Barrett’s prophesy come to pass, this may not be the last word on content-based, view-point neutral restrictions. 

Late last month, the Supreme Court issued two opinions which seemingly shook up the field of administrative law.  As explained in this article, however, while both decisions bear significantly on certain administrative agencies, neither of these decisions are likely to present significant changes to Section 337 practice at the International Trade Commission. 

On May 29, 2024, the Western District of Oklahoma in SIPCO, LLC v. JASCO Prods. Co. dismissed the plaintiff SIPCO’s patent infringement claims against defendant JASCO because of a minor typo made by the USPTO during prosecution.

Last week, Sun Patent Trust sued Xiaomi in France for infringement of patents claimed to be essential to the LTE-Advanced standard. In its suit, Sun Patent Trust asked French courts to set a global FRAND rate—something that has never occurred before.