Expert Analysis

• How Copyright Office AI Standards Depart From Precedent

  

  The U.S. Copyright Office's recent departure from decades of precedent for technology-assisted works, and express refusal to grant protection to artificial intelligence-assisted works, may change as the dust settles around ancillary copyright issues for AI currently pending in litigation, says Kristine Craig at Hanson Bridgett.

• IP Considerations For Companies In Carbon Capture Sector

  

  As companies collaborate to commercialize carbon capture technologies amid massive government investment under the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, a coherent intellectual property strategy is more important than ever, including proactively addressing and resolving questions about ownership of the technology, say Ashley Kennedy and James De Vellis at Foley & Lardner.

• Does Expert Testimony Aid Preliminary IPR Responses?

  

  Dechert attorneys analyze six years of patent owners' preliminary responses to inter partes review petitions to determine whether the elimination of the presumption favoring the petitioner as to preinstitution testimonial evidence affected the usefulness of expert testimony in responses.

• Rebuttal

  Double-Patenting Ruling Shows Terminal Disclaimers' Value

  

  While a recent Law360 guest article seems to argue that the Federal Circuit’s Cellect decision last year robs patent owners of lawful patent term, the ruling actually identifies how terminal disclaimers are the solution to the problem of obviousness-type double patenting, say Jane Love and Robert Trenchard at Gibson Dunn.

• Series

  Swimming Makes Me A Better Lawyer

  

  Years of participation in swimming events, especially in the open water, have proven to be ideal preparation for appellate arguments in court — just as you must put your trust in the ocean when competing in a swim event, you must do the same with the judicial process, says John Kulewicz at Vorys.

• How Courts Are Interpreting Fed. Circ. IPR Estoppel Ruling

  

  In the year since the Federal Circuit’s Ironburg ruling, which clarified the scope of inter partes and post-grant review estoppel, district court decisions show that application of IPR or PGR estoppel may become a resource-intensive inquiry, say Whitney Meier Howard and Michelle Lavrichenko at Venable.

• Should NIL Collectives Be Allowed Tax-Favored Status?

  

  Arguments are being made for and against allowing organizations to provide charitable contribution tax deductions for donations used to compensate student-athletes, a practice with impacts on competition for student-athletes and overall tax fairness, but ultimately it is a question for Congress, say Andres Castillo and Barry Gogel at the University of Maryland School of Law.

• What 100 Federal Cases Suggest About Changes To Chevron

  

  With the U.S. Supreme Court poised to overturn or narrow its 40-year-old doctrine of Chevron deference, a review of 100 recent federal district court decisions confirm that changes to the Chevron framework will have broad ramifications — but the magnitude of the impact will depend on the details of the high court's ruling, say Kali Schellenberg and Jon Cochran at LeVan Stapleton.

• Patent Damages Jury Verdicts Aren't Always End Of The Story

  

  Recent outcomes demonstrate that patent damages jury verdicts are often challenged and are overturned approximately one-third of the time, and successful verdict challenges typically occur at the appellate level and concern patent validity and infringement, say James Donohue and Marie Sanyal at Charles River.

• Manufacturers Should Pay Attention To 'Right-To-Repair' Laws

  

  Oregon’s recently passed "right-to-repair" statute highlights that the R2R movement is not going away, and that manufacturers of all kinds need to be paying attention to the evolving list of R2R statutes in various states and consider participating in the process, says Courtney Sarnow at Culhane.

• Why High Court May Have Rejected IP Obviousness Appeal

  

  Attorneys at Womble Bond analyze possible reasons the U.S. Supreme Court rejected Vanda Pharmaceuticals' request to review the Federal Circuit’s reasonable expectation of success standard for determining obviousness, including that the court was unpersuaded by the company's argument that Amgen v. Sanofi places a bind on drug developers.

• Opinion

  Viral Deepfakes Of Taylor Swift Highlight Need For Regulation

  

  As the nation grapples with addressing risk from artificial intelligence use, the recent circulation of AI-generated pornographic images of Taylor Swift on the social platform X highlights the need for federal legislation to protect nonconsenting subjects of deepfake pornography, say Nicole Brenner and Susie Ruiz-Lichter at Squire Patton.

• A Guide To Using The DTSA For Misappropriation Recourse

  Excerpt from Practical Guidance

  

  Nicholas Armington at Mintz explains the ins and outs of drafting a misappropriation complaint under the Defend Trade Secrets Act, and how and why companies should think strategically about federal and state law when filing a claim.

• How Cos. Can Protect IP In Light Of FTC Noncompete Rule

  

  While several groups are challenging the Federal Trade Commission’s recently approved rule banning noncompetition agreements, employers should begin planning other ways to protect their valuable trade secrets, confidential information and other intellectual property, says Thomas Duston at Marshall Gerstein.

• The Fed. Circ. In April: Hurdles Remain For Generics

  

  The Federal Circuit’s recent Salix v. Norwich ruling — where Salix's brand-name drug's patents were invalidated — is a reminder to patent practitioners that invalidating a competitor's patents may not guarantee abbreviated new drug application approval, say Sean Murray and Jeremiah Helm at Knobbe Martens.