Patent Eligibility Bulletin: New USPTO Guidance And AI Risks

Law360, David Glass & Reilley Keane, 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

Law360, Ryan Davis, 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

Law360, Amee Shah, 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

Law360, Adam Lidgett, 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

Law360, Ryan Davis, 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

Law360, Adam Kelly & Sophia Gunzburg, 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.

USPTO Officials Stress That Patent Interviews Are Still Vital

Law360, Theresa Schliep, July 15, 2026

Officials from the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office emphasized that interviews with examiners are still an essential part of the patent prosecution process. "There's this misnomer that interviews are now disfavored, and it's absolutely incorrect," said Barry J. Schindler, a deputy commissioner for patents. "The answer is interviews are not just favored; we understand them as the way to get allowances."

Unintentional Delay: USPTO Shortens Threshold for Additional Information Requirement

The National Law Review, Kelsey Wun, McDermott Will & Schulte LLP, July 1, 2026

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) revised its practice of requiring additional information for certain petitions based on unintentional delay and changed the conditions under which the corresponding higher petition fee applies. Under the new rule, the USPTO has shortened the threshold for requiring additional information from two years to one year. The new rule is effective August 13, 2026.

5 Key Factors Behind USPTO's Inter Partes Review Decisions

Law360, Christopher Loh, June 25, 2026

In a May 14 precedential order in Magnolia Medical Technologies Inc. v. Kurin Inc., U.S. Patent and Trademark Office Director John Squires has articulated key factors underlying his inter partes review institution decisions. This order provides important insight into his decision-making process.

Adjusting IPR Tactics As Google Fights 'Settled Expectations'

Law360, Abdul Abdullahi, June 12, 2026

Google filed a U.S. Supreme Court certiorari petition in Google LLC v. VirtaMove Corp., challenging the Patent Trial and Appeal Board's so-called settled expectations practice. Accused infringers should take this filing seriously because validity challenges against older patents now have to be rethought.