Patent Eligibility Bulletin: New USPTO Guidance And AI Risks

July 31, 2026

Under Director John Squires, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has signaled a more permissive stance toward patent eligibility, particularly for AI-related inventions. However, the Federal Circuit continues to apply the framework established by the Supreme Court's 2014 decision in Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank International rigorously. Squires issued an updated memorandum, superseding the December 2025 guidance for best practices for submission of Rule 132 subject matter eligibility declarations. The USPTO proposes making the SMED memo a living document that will incorporate periodic updates based on practitioner experience and gathered knowledge.

Tesla Tells Justices USPTO Is 'Gutting' Patent Reviews

July 30, 2026

Tesla Inc. has become the latest company to ask the U.S. Supreme Court to review limits that the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office has put on patent challenges, arguing that the office is "gutting" the review system created by the America Invents Act. In a cert petition, the electric-vehicle maker appealed a February decision by the Federal Circuit rejecting its argument that the office has no authority to use the scheduled trial date in related litigation as a reason not to review patents.

Patent Eligibility Reforms Keep Chasing The Wrong Fixes

July 29, 2026

Patent eligibility was never going to be clear. Congress wrote Section 101 of the U.S. Patent Act broadly on purpose, knowing that innovation cannot be predicted. Any statute trying to enumerate what is patentable today could be wrong tomorrow. Courts were always going to fill that gap. After two decades inside this system, I think the fixes have been pointed in the wrong direction.

High Court Asked To Take Another Settled Expectations Case

July 28, 2026

E-learning company Kahoot Inc. is pushing the U.S. Supreme Court to take up its challenge to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office's practice of using settled expectations as a reason to deny patent reviews, marking the second petition before the high court on the issue. The patent office set that time frame at about six years. Kahoot argued that was an "arbitrary" number, and it contended that using a patent's age to deny review went against the America Invents Act, which set up the current inter partes review system. Kahoot argued that "congressional grant of discretion does not authorize the USPTO to rely on an arbitrary patent age limit that is wholly absent from the statutory timing framework."

USPTO Calls For More Info In Anonymous Reexam Requests

July 21, 2026

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office called for ending the practice of allowing those requesting patent reexamination to remain completely anonymous, instead proposing a rule that would require them to identify themselves and interested parties to the office, but not the public.

Federal Circuit Licensing Rulings Shed Light On Patentee Standing

July 17, 2026

In the two years since the U.S. Supreme Court declined to review Zebra Technologies Corp. v. Intellectual Tech LLC, important questions have remained regarding how a patent owner could retain Article III standing after licensing significant patent rights to another party. But now additional guidance has arrived in two decisions from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit — A.L.M. Holding Co. v. Zydex Industries Private Ltd. and Recor Medical Inc. v. Medtronic Ireland Manufacturing Unlimited Company.