Imagine That IP Law Blog

Introduction
The person of ordinary skill in the art is central to many patent-law inquiries, but not in the same way across the Patent Act. Section 103 expressly asks whether the claimed invention would have been obvious to a POSITA. Section 112 often turns on what the skilled artisan would have understood from the disclosure. Claim construction likewise depends on how claim language would be understood in view of the intrinsic record. Section 101 is different. Unlike § 103, § 101 does not ask what would have been obvious to a POSITA. The POSITA enters eligibility indirectly, through ... Read More ›

Introduction
The recent debate over artificial intelligence and inventorship has often focused on a single question: can an AI system such as ChatGPT, DABUS, or another generative model be named as an inventor on a United States patent application? The Federal Circuit answered that question in Thaler v. Vidal, holding that the Patent Act limits inventorship to natural persons. Thaler v. Vidal, 43 F.4th 1207, 1211-13 (Fed. Cir. 2022). Yet the next wave of disputes is unlikely to end with Thaler. Parties will continue to argue that AI systems do more than merely assist human inventors ... Read More ›