Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: August 14, 2019
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comOn May 22, 2019, a bipartisan group of lawmakers introduced draft patent eligibility legislation. Among other changes, the bill would remove the judicial exceptions to patent eligibility.

Patent eligibility reform is a hot topic. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued revised guidance in January. Now, Congress is also attempting to return predictability to patent eligibility.
The bicameral bill was introduced by U.S. Senators Thom Tillis (R-NC) and Chris Coons (D-DE), Chair and Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property, and Representative Doug Collins (R-GA-9), Ranking Member of the House Judiciary Committee, Hank Johnson (D-GA-4), Chairman of the House Judiciary Subcommittee on Intellectual Property and the Courts, and Steve Stivers (R-OH-15).
It contains more details than the framework Sens. Tillis and Coons released in April. However, the sponsors made it clear that the language contained in the draft bill text is not final and is subject to additional revision.
In the July 10, 2019 Federal Circuit Court decision of Athena Diagnostics v. Mayo, Judge Moore suggested in her opinion that there is no more that the Federal Circuit can do to provide clarity of patent eligibility and that “your only hope lies with the Supreme Court or Congress”. Senator Tillis and Congress have commented that this decision shows that legislative action is both urgent and critical.
Section 101 of the Patent Act provides that “whoever invents or discovers any new and useful process, machine, manufacture or composition of matter of any new and useful improvement thereof, may obtain a patent, therefore, subject to the conditions and requirements of this title”.
Below are several other proposed legislative provisions:
The patent eligibility landscape is poised to change dramatically. However, the extent of the changes and the timeline for implementation are still very uncertain. We encourage entities and individuals that may be impacted by patent reform to check back for updates and contact a member of the Scarinci Hollenbeck Intellectual Property Group with any questions.
If you have any questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, David Einhorn, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-806-3364.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!