Features

To survive preemption under §301 of the Copyright Act, courts consider whether a state law claim in a lawsuit has an "extra element" that qualitatively distinguishes it from a federal copyright claim. Courts typically find that state law claims, such as breach of contract, have an extra element. Other state law claims, such as conversion, get varying court determinations as to whether they are preempted.

Features

In the past year, the Federal Circuit has repeatedly required the U.S. District Court for the Western District of Texas to transfer patent infringement suits from that district to more convenient venues, and in doing so it has provided increasingly specific — and often pointed — guidance to courts and litigants on the appropriate analysis for transfer motions.

Features

The U.S. Supreme Court granted certiorari in Unicolors v. H&M Hennes & Mauritz to address the following question: "Did the Ninth Circuit err in breaking with its own prior precedent and the findings of other circuits and the Copyright Office in holding that 17 U.S.C. §411 requires referral to the Copyright Office where there is no indicia of fraud or material error as to the work at issue in the subject copyright registration?"

Features

The agency announced that the Department of Commerce has applied to register the USPTO's marks in a bid to crack down on scammers who are impersonating the agency.

Columns & Departments

Federal Circuit Clarifies Pleading Requirements for Patent Cases and Affirms Grant of Summary Judgment of Invalidity under 35 U.S.C. §101 Federal Circuit Holds that Pendency of Motions Unrelated to Interlocutory Judgment Does Not Toll 30-Day Limit to File Notice of Appeal

Features

For the foreseeable future, patent applications involving artificial intelligence technologies will increase with the continued proliferation of such technologies. However, subject matter eligibility can be a significant challenge in securing patents on artificial intelligence and machine learning.

Features

Nearly a century after endorsing the doctrine of assignor estoppel, the Court concluded that it applies "when, but only when, the assignor's claim of invalidity contradicts explicit or implicit representations he made in assigning the patent."

Features

The Supreme Court is considering a petition in a §101 case, in which the Federal Circuit split six-to-six in denying rehearing en banc, and in which the Supreme Court recently called for the views of the Solicitor General.