Overlooked for decades in the field of U.S. pharmaceutical patents, § 112 (f) is the focus of this webinar, presented by experts from Merck, UCB, and Eli Lilly and moderated by Tom Irving (Finnegan).  Speakers will discuss how § 112 (f) can be a tool for achieving means-plus-function (MPF) claims for brand U.S. pharma applicants.  By statute, the claims can cover equivalents by providing for literal infringement. The panel will also explain the need for MPF in pharma.

Our panelists -- an in-house counsel at a major software company, a leading professor of copyright who wrote an amicus brief for Google, and a litigator for Oracle who is co-counsel in the case -- will discuss any surprises in the Justices' questioning or in the counsels' replies, highlight the most memorable interchanges, read some tea leaves, and discuss possible outcomes and their impact.

For centuries, employers have used non-compete contracts (NCCs) to prohibit an employee from working for or becoming a competitor for a certain period of time. But in recent years these state law contracts have faced harsh criticism for limiting the ability of workers to earn a living. Many states have adopted or are considering a combination of reforms, including increasing transparency for workers and limiting non-competes’ application.

Nothing in FRAND is simple, and the world after Unwired Planet is dauntingly uncertain. This webinar brings together litigators from the U.S., China, and Germany, as well as a global SEP owner, to consider the likely behavior of courts and litigants outside of London.

This webinar will describe the issues involved with training AI models using sensitive information. Attendees will also learn about the data privacy risks and legal implications that arise when AI models are trained using sensitive information. Lastly, this webinar will discuss data science techniques that can prevent the problem of “unintended memorization.”

Our panelists will discuss how the Alice/Mayo test for patent eligibility are not being applied to method of manufacturing patents. Do these cases push the Alice/Mayo test too far? Do they further conflate patent eligibility with obviousness or enablement? And do they put manufacturing, mechanical, and electrical patents more at risk for eligibility challenges (and cancellation)? Join us as we discuss these cases and the current state of patent eligibility.

A decision this spring by the Eleventh Circuit appears to offer publishers of data a novel way to pursue website scrapers by using trade secret law. The decision is thus also an important possible threat to companies that depend on others’ data as fodder for their artificial intelligence solutions. Panelists include a top IP lawyer at a global tech company active in AI and two litigators.

The Federal Circuit’s reasoning in Electrical Power Group v. Alsom has zapped more than twenty software patents since 2016, invalidating them as abstract under Alice. Particularly at risk are inventions in the booming area of artificial intelligence (“AI”). Our panelists, two in-house counsel at technology companies and a law firm expert, will analyze the Electrical Power Group line of cases and provide patent prosecutors with practical advice on how to avoid its pitfalls for AI related inventions.

In this program a balanced panel of experts will analyze the latest milestone in the escalating battles over 5G SEPs. The July decision in Sisvel v. Haier by Germany’s highest court, the Federal Court of Justice (GFCJ), is considered a game-changer in Europe. It is the first FRAND-related case to be heard at the top German court since the Court of Justice of the European Union’s landmark 2015 Huawei v ZTE decision.

This webinar will review and analyze the latest judicial guideposts regarding the role and weight of objective indicia in evaluating the non-obviousness of a claimed invention. Uncertainty in this area dates back to Graham v. Deere, where the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly endorsed the use of secondary considerations but failed to clarify their role.

This webinar, which is the third in our recent European Practice Webinar Series, will address life sciences developments and, specifically, patentability at the EPO. Our panel, which is composed of experienced attorneys based in Europe, will discuss a wide array of issues

IP practice in Europe involves many interesting issues, and none more so than the implications of Brexit and developments concerning the proposed Unified Patent Court (UPC). This webinar will bring together well-known IP practitioners from the U.K.’s Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and IPO’s European Practice Committee to discuss the latest updates relating to these topics and to provide insight on what the future of practice in Europe will look like.

IP practice in Europe involves many interesting issues, and none more so than the implications of Brexit and developments concerning the proposed Unified Patent Court (UPC). This webinar will bring together well-known IP practitioners from the U.K.’s Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys and IPO’s European Practice Committee to discuss the latest updates relating to these topics and to provide insight on what the future of practice in Europe will look like.

This program will discuss the speedy rise of the Western District of Texas as a litigation hotspot and important PTAB decisions about Section 314 that have gone some way to change the complex interaction between post-grant proceedings at the PTAB and related district court actions. Panelists include the Hon. Alan Albright, U.S. District Court Judge for the Western District of Texas, and two patent litigators, one of whom is a former PTAB judge.

Some of the most interesting and talked-about IP issues, both nationally and internationally, are those relating to artificial intelligence (AI). Among AI issues, patentability and inventorship are hot topics that will likely only continue to increase in importance. On this webinar, panelists will discuss how those issues are playing out in Europe.