ARTICLE
31 May 2016

May 2016 101 Guidance From The USPTO

M
Mintz

Contributor

Mintz is a litigation powerhouse and business accelerator serving leaders in life sciences, private equity, sustainable energy, and technology. The world’s most innovative companies trust Mintz to provide expert advice, protect and monetize their IP, negotiate deals, source financing, and solve complex legal challenges. The firm has over 600 attorneys across offices in Boston, Los Angeles, Miami, New York, Washington, DC, San Francisco, San Diego, and Toronto.
There have been some interesting recent developments, both at the Federal Circuit and the USPTO, regarding subject matter eligibility for patenting as it relates to computer-implemented inventions...
United States Intellectual Property

There have been some interesting recent developments, both at the Federal Circuit and the USPTO, regarding subject matter eligibility for patenting as it relates to computer-implemented inventions, software, and other technologies that have been heavily impacted over the past two years by the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Alice v. CLS Bank.

For our client alert on May 2016 guidance on patent eligibility for claims that are allegedly directed to abstract ideas, please click here, and to read more about how these subject matter eligibility instructions affect the patents and patent applications that relate to the life sciences, please click here.

For our May 17 blog post on the latest post-Alice guidance from the Federal Circuit, please click here.

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.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More