Search Results for: "sas institute"

The USPTO’s Statement on Required Practitioner Review of Information on an IDS

Ethics

by David Hricik, Mercer Law School

Dennis pointed out that the Director has in Ecto World, LLC v. RAI Strategic Holdings, Inc, IPR2024-01280_paper_13_20250519 made it very difficult to obtain institution if a petition is based on art that was listed on an IDS even if it was not actually applied by an examiner, unless the art was listed on a “voluminous” IDS.  That is a step back from the more real-world approach that had included examining whether the reference had actually been applied.

Dennis points out that avoiding “voluminous” (whatever that means) IDSs should help insulate patents from institution.  Also reducing length is a statement by the Office that signing an IDS certifies that the practitioner has reviewed every reference listed.  Specifically, In its Guidance on Use of Artificial Intelligence-Based Tools, the Office the Office expressed a concern that, while AI can be used to populate IDSs, doing so posed “the danger of increasing the number and size of IDS submissions to the USPTO, which could burden the Office with large numbers of cumulative and irrelevant submissions.” 89 Fed. Reg. at 25615-16. As a result, it noted the duty of reasonable inquiry included “reviewing each piece of prior art listed on the form” to determine if it was compliant with 37 CFR 11.18(b). Id. at 25616. Thus, review is required and clearly irrelevant and marginally pertinent information should be removed to avoid filing a paper for an improper purpose. Id.

That approach, interestingly, is somewhat similar to what OED Director Moatz suggested maybe 20 years ago, which was heavily criticized by practitioners as unrealistic.  I am not sure the Office’s statement about reviewing each reference has achieved as much publicity now as it did back then, so stay tuned.

Tapping our Full Potential: Nominations for US Council on Inclusive Innovation

Patent

by Dennis Crouch

A cornerstone of Dir. Kathi Vidal's tenure as USPTO Director has been a continued focus on inclusivity and diversity in the innovation ecosphere.  In 2024, the USPTO launched a significant initiative to address major disparities in patent participation among underrepresented groups -- with strong support from the Council for Inclusive Innovation (CI2).  CI2 is now seeking nominations for new council members. In addition to highlighting the nomination process, this post provides some critiques on the initiative's approach to fostering a more diverse and dynamic innovation landscape in the United States.

To continue reading, become a Patently-O member. Already a member? Simply log in to access the full post.

The AGI Lawsuit: Elon Musk vs. OpenAI and the Quest for Artificial General Intelligence that Benefits Humanity

Patent, ,

By Dennis Crouch

Elon Musk was instrumental in the initial creation of OpenAI as a nonprofit with the vision of responsibly developing artificial intelligence (AI) to benefit humanity and to prevent monopolistic control over the technology. After ChatGPT went viral in late 2022, the company began focusing more on revenue and profits.  It added a major for-profit subsidiary and completed a $13+ billion deal with Microsoft -- entitling the industry giant to a large share of OpenAI's future profits and a seat on the Board. 

In a new lawsuit, Elon Musk alleges that OpenAI and its CEO Sam Altman have breached the organization's founding vision. [Musk vs OpenAI]. 

To continue reading, become a Patently-O member. Already a member? Simply log in to access the full post.

Ethical Infantilism in the Age of Technological Advancement

Patent, ,

by Dennis Crouch

Martin Luther King Jr. received the Nobel Peace Prize in 1964, and I re-read his speech today -- especially the portion contrasting development of science and technology against development of the human spirit.  The past 60 years have continued to reveal astonishing discoveries and invention. Yet King’s words and warnings continue to resonate because we have continued to neglect our internal realm.

Every man lives in two realms, the internal and the external. The internal is that realm of spiritual ends expressed in art, literature, morals, and religion. The external is that complex of devices, techniques, mechanisms, and instrumentalities by means of which we live.

King.  In his speech, King did not decry advances in technology, but argued that the level of attention paid to material advances should be matched by attention to moral and spiritual humanism.

Modern man has brought the whole world to an awe-inspiring threshold of the future. He has reached new and astonishing peaks of scientific success. He has produced machines that think, and instruments that peer into the unfathomable ranges of interstellar space. He has built gigantic bridges to span the seas and gargantuan buildings to kiss the skies. His airplanes and spaceships have dwarfed distance, placed time in chains, and carved highways through the stratosphere. This is a dazzling picture of modern man’s scientific and technological progress.

Yet, in spite of these spectacular strides in science and technology, and still unlimited ones to come, something basic is missing. There is a sort of poverty of the spirit which stands in glaring contrast to our scientific and technological abundance. The richer we have become materially, the poorer we have become morally and spiritually. We have learned to fly the air like birds and swim the sea like fish, but we have not learned the simple art of living together as brothers.

Id.

To continue reading, become a Patently-O member. Already a member? Simply log in to access the full post.