Applying artificial intelligence to a specialized field does not necessarily make an invention patent eligible. Marshall Gerstein Partner Ryan Phelan looks at this important distinction in his latest contribution to IPO Daily News, a members-only newsletter published by the Intellectual Property Owners Association.
Ryan discusses the Federal Circuit’s recent decision in Dental Monitoring SAS v. Align Technology, Inc., which found several AI-based dental monitoring patent claims ineligible under Section 101. Although the decision is nonprecedential, it offers an important reminder for companies and patent practitioners: applying conventional machine learning to a specialized field, even using a large, domain-specific training dataset, may not be enough to establish patent eligibility. AI-related claims should identify the specific technological mechanism or improvement underlying the invention.
Ryan is a regular contributor to IPO Daily News’ “AI Insights” column, where he provides timely analysis of court decisions, regulatory developments, and other issues affecting patents and emerging technologies. He also authors PatentNext, Marshall Gerstein’s blog covering patent and intellectual property law involving artificial intelligence and other next-generation technologies.
Read Ryan’s latest AI Insights article on IPO’s website.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
[View Source]