Imagine That IP Law Blog

Prior art searching is an important, but very time-consuming, part of the patent process. An applicant may optionally choose to run its own prior art search prior to filing an application. However, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will conduct its search later, during substantive examination. The result is that truly relevant art may surfaces only months or years have passed, when claim scope is already in motion and prosecution strategy is underway.

To help address this timing gap, the USPTO launched the Artificial Intelligence Search Automated Pilot ... Read More ›

For companies seeking patent protection in Germany, timing can be critical. An applicant may want rights in place quickly to strengthen its position against competitors, support licensing or investment discussions, or prepare for possible enforcement. But the fastest route is not always the same as the strongest or broadest form of protection. In Germany, applicants can choose among several options that balance speed, cost, and claim scope in different ways. In many cases, the most effective strategy is to combine short-term protection with a longer-term examined patent ... Read More ›

Standards do not just happen. They are built line-by-line and meeting-by-meeting through the efforts of many stakeholders including engineers, researchers, and companies that show up and do the work required to develop a standard. In many industries, including wireless and cellular communications, standards development can shape entire markets. It influences interoperability, device and network roadmaps, certification expectations, and the technical direction of the ecosystem.

The challenge is that meaningful participation in standards development organizations ... Read More ›

Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations (“SMEDs”) are declarations submitted under 37 C.F.R. § 1.132 to place factual evidence into the record when responding to a § 101 subject matter eligibility rejection.  On December 4, 2025, the USPTO Director issued a memorandum highlighting SMEDs as a tool for eligibility disputes, particularly where the analysis may turn on technical facts like the state of the art, how a person of ordinary skill in the art would read the specification, or whether the claims reflect a technological improvement. The memorandum does not change § 101 ... Read More ›