enow.com Web Search

Search results

  1. Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
  2. United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Court_of...

    Patents, including appeals arising from an action against the Commissioner of Patents and Trademarks under 35 U.S.C. § 145; The Little Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1346; Section 211 of the Economic Stabilization Act of 1970; Section 5 of the Emergency Petroleum Allocation Act of 1973; Section 523 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975; and

  3. Brenner v. Manson - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brenner_v._Manson

    Brenner v. Manson, 383 U.S. 519 (1966), was a decision of the United States Supreme Court in which the Court held that a novel process for making a known steroid did not satisfy the utility requirement, because the patent applicants did not show that the steroid served any practical function. [1]

  4. DABUS - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DABUS

    The judge and Thaler agreed in this case that Thaler himself is unable to receive the patent on behalf of DABUS. [ citation needed ] In their August 5, 2022, Thaler decision, the US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that only a natural person could be an inventor, which means that the AI that invents any other type of invention ...

  5. Supreme Court considers whether AI can be named as inventor ...

    www.aol.com/supreme-court-considers-whether-ai...

    For premium support please call: 800-290-4726 more ways to reach us

  6. List of United States Supreme Court patent case law

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States...

    State trade secret law not preempted by patent law. Dann v. Johnston: 425 U.S. 219: 1976: Patentability of a claim for a business method patent (but the decision turns on obviousness rather than patent-eligibility). Sakraida v. Ag Pro: 425 U.S. 273: 1976

  7. AI cannot be named as inventor, Supreme Court rules in patent ...

    www.aol.com/ai-cannot-named-inventor-supreme...

    Robert Jehan, of law firm Williams Powell, who represented Dr Thaler at the Supreme Court, said the judgment shows “how poorly current UK patent law supports the aim of making the UK a global ...

  8. U.K. Supreme Court deals bitter blow to AI-inventor patent hopes

    www.aol.com/finance/u-k-supreme-court-deals...

    Artificial Inventor Project chief Ryan Abbott, who represented Thaler in the U.K. case, told me he found the ruling “unfortunate,” but he took heart from the fact that the Supreme Court said ...

  9. Artificial intelligence and copyright - Wikipedia

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_intelligence...

    The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) similarly codified restrictions on the patentability of patents credits solely to AI authors in February 2024, following an August 2023 ruling in the case Thaler v. Perlmutter. In this case, the Patent Office denied grant to patents created by Stephen Thaler's AI program, DABUS due to the lack of a ...