United States: Patent

In Definitive Holdings v. Powerteq, No. 2024-1761 (Fed. Cir. Apr. 14, 2026), the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment that the asserted claims were invalid under pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. § 102(b)...

Today’s drug development programs routinely span continents: distributed research teams, multinational clinical trial networks, and complex webs of cross-border licensing, contract manufacturing...

Patent translation is often treated as a discrete, linguistic step within the global patent process. In practice, even high-quality patent translation requires careful coordination with jurisdiction-specific...

As artificial intelligence systems become increasingly sophisticated in generating inventions, creative works, and commercial content, a fundamental legal question emerges: can AI itself hold intellectual property rights?

The U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division has articulated a clear position on the relationship between antitrust law and intellectual property rights through recent statements of interest and policy speeches. These pronouncements address critical questions about patent enforcement, standard-essential patents, and the availability of injunctive relief in patent litigation. The DOJ's consistent messaging provides important guidance for navigating the intersection of competition policy and innovation i

The USPTO has announced significant developments in patent examination procedures, including a new pre-order process for reexamination proceedings and AI-enhanced trademark search capabilities.

Patents serve as the fundamental currency of the medical technology industry, enabling companies to raise capital, form strategic alliances, and generate licensing revenue. Yet many medtech innovators fail to treat their intellectual property as a core business asset, risking the loss of competitive advantage and market exclusivity that could diminish the full value of their innovations.

Widespread deforestation poses a significant threat to the integrity of ecosystems around the world.

A recent Patent Trial and Appeal Board decision reversed an examiner's obviousness rejection, finding that overlapping dimensional ranges alone were insufficient to establish prima facie obviousness when the proposed modification would alter the reference's intended function.