Categories
FARMING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Patents

The Rise of 4D Printing: Exploring the Future of Manufacturing

Additive manufacturing, commonly known as 3D, has emerged as a robust and reliable technological alternative to many traditional manufacturing and fabrication methods. However, a new and potentially disruptive advancement is quickly gaining momentum in the backdrop of technology. This development promises to revolutionize industries even more profoundly than 3D manufacturing has done so far.

Introduce the concept of 4-dimensional print, which encompasses 4D bioprinting, active origami, and shape-morphing systems.

What is 4d Printing:

 4D goes beyond the three-dimensional length, breadth, and height by incorporating the fourth dimension of time into the additive manufacturing process. This approach enables materials to dynamically change shape, transform properties, or self-assemble over time in response to environmental stimuli such as temperature, moisture, or light.

Difference Between 3d Printing and 4d manufacturing:  

 In 3D manufacturing, layers of material are sequentially built into a 3d object, following a path from the bottom to the top, creating a static structure. On the other hand, 4D manufacturing utilizes similar layering techniques but distinguishes itself through advanced, programmable materials. These materials can autonomously transform their shape, properties, or functionality in response to external stimuli or environmental changes.

One example of these advanced and programmable materials is a shape memory polymer (SMP). SMPs can undergo large-scale elastic transformation in response to environmental stimuli.

The three most common shape memory polymers are Polytetrafluoroethylene (PFTE), polylactide (PLA), and ethylene-vinyl acetate (EVA).

Domain:

 One of the most effective ways to predict the future trajectory of any technology is by examining the applications submitted for that technology in recent years.

Patenting Trend

Publication Country:

 China has filed the highest number of .

Conclusion:

 4D printing holds tremendous promise for applications requiring responsive transformation triggered by external stimuli or the environment. Countries like China, , and the US are key contributors to investing in research and development (R&D) to advance 4D printing technologies.

Examination of market trends and () reveals a growth trajectory for 4D printing over the past years. These trends indicate that 4D printing is set for significant growth in the coming years, driven by increasing investments, technological advancements, and expanding applications across various industries.

As R&D efforts continue to refine the capability of the programmable material and optimize manufacturing processes, the commercial adoption of 4D printing is to accelerate. This evolution promises to revolutionize fields ranging from aerospace and healthcare to consumer , offering dynamic solutions that adapt and respond to changing environmental conditions autonomously.

In conclusion, the burgeoning interest from major global players and the upward trajectory of filing indicates a promising future for 4D printing, positioning it as a transformative force in the manufacturing landscape in the years ahead

AUTHOR:  AVANTIKA BHARDWAJ, PATENT RESEARCH ANALYST

Categories
FARMING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Patents

From Patents to Progress: Tesla’s Ongoing Pursuit of Advanced AI Solutions in 2024

In the rapidly changing field of artificial intelligence (AI) and self-driving cars, Tesla constantly boundaries with innovative advancements. Recently released filings demonstrate Tesla’s commitment to advancing technology in various areas through patents and applications.

  1. CN118097361A: Specific Subject Grammar Generation Method And Device Based On Non-Training

 Tesla’s latest filing introduces a novel method for generating specific subject graphs based on non-training AI techniques. This method transforms how AI generates visual content from textual descriptions. Traditionally, AI systems require extensive training datasets to perform such tasks. However, Tesla’s approach eliminates this need, significantly reducing user costs and environmental impact.

The method involves:
  • Receiving User Input: Users provide a textual description of a specific subject they wish to generate.
  • Subject Identification: AI identifies the subject and retrieves corresponding images from a pre-generated database.
  • Image Fusion: Main body pictures are encoded and fused to create composite images.
  • Generation: These composite images, with specific characteristics, are fed into a text-to-picture generator to produce the final output.

This innovative technique improves efficiency and further expands the application of AI to generate diverse subjects like humans, animals, plants, or objects.

  1. US20240185552A1: Enhanced Object Detection For Autonomous Vehicles Based On Field View

 In autonomous driving, Tesla unveils advancements in object detection systems. This patent focuses on improving object detection capabilities using enhanced field-of-view (FOV) techniques. Tesla improves object detection by strategically placing image sensors on vehicles, using vanishing lines and FOV cropping. Key features:

  • Image Processing: Images captured by sensors are processed to determine FOV and vanishing lines.
  • Object Detection: A convolutional neural network (CNN) analyses cropped and downsampled images to detect objects.
  • Output: Detailed object information is crucial for vehicle navigation and safety.

This technology underscores Tesla’s commitment to refining autonomous driving systems, making them safer and more reliable.

  1. US20240185445A1: Artificial Intelligence Modeling Techniques For Vision-Based Occupancy Determination

 Another significant patent from Tesla addresses AI modeling techniques for occupancy determination using camera feeds. This innovation allows Tesla vehicles to analyze their surroundings by predicting the occupancy attributes of voxels based on AI models. By interpreting camera data, Tesla enhances its ability to perceive and navigate complex environments.

The process involves:
  • Image Input: Camera feeds from Tesla vehicles capture surrounding environments.
  • AI Execution: AI models predict occupancy attributes for voxels within the environment.
  • Dataset Generation: A dataset is based on voxel attributes, aiding vehicle decision-making.

This advancement highlights Tesla’s integration of AI to improve environmental awareness and enhance autonomous driving capabilities.

  1. CN118012266A: Gesture Recognition-Based Automatic Control Method And Device For Presentation File

 Tesla’s commitment to user interaction extends to gesture recognition technology for presentation control. This patent introduces a method to automate presentation controls based on gesture recognition. By analyzing hand gestures, Tesla enhances the precision and efficiency of managing presentation materials.

Key steps include:
  • Gesture Collection: Data from operators’ hand images is collected.
  • Gesture Analysis: Static gesture recognition algorithms identify gestures aligned with control instructions.
  • Presentation Control: Based on recognized gestures, Tesla prompts readiness and executes corresponding presentation commands.

This innovation enhances user experience by eliminating errors in gesture recognition and improving overall presentation control accuracy.

  1. US20240177455A1: Systems And Methods For Training Machine Models With Augmented Data

 Lastly, Tesla explores methods for training machine learning models using augmented data. By leveraging images captured from multiple cameras, Tesla enhances model robustness and accuracy. This approach ensures Tesla’s AI systems perform reliably across diverse scenarios and conditions.

The process includes:
  • Data Augmentation: Images from camera feeds are modified while maintaining their original properties.
  • Model Training: Machine learning models trained using augmented images to predict outputs effectively.

This technique underscores Tesla’s commitment to advancing AI capabilities through comprehensive training methodologies.

Conclusion

 Tesla’s recent patents and filings underscore its leadership in integrating AI and autonomous technologies. From innovative object detection systems to advanced AI modeling techniques, Tesla continues to redefine the future of transportation and artificial intelligence. These advancements improve vehicle safety and efficiency and open up possibilities for various uses in industries relying on AI. As Tesla continues to innovate, the future promises even more transformative advancements in technology and mobility.

Stay tuned for more updates on Tesla’s ground-breaking developments in the coming months!

AUTHOR:  TAMANNA, PATENT RESEARCH ANALYST

Categories
FARMING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Patents

AI vs. Human Intelligence: Finding the Right Balance for IPR Searches

The use of human experts versus AI-based search tools in intellectual property rights (IPR) is the subject of ongoing debate. While AI has made significant strides in automating search processes and handling vast amounts of data, there are several reasons why manual searches by human professionals remain essential and, in many cases, superior. Here are some reasons why humans are better than AI for IPR searches and why AI still can not replace human jobs in this sector.

Contextual Understanding and Interpretation

 Detailed insight: If we talk about taking the knowledge insights from the patents for our different novelty, invalidity, and infringement searches, human experts possess a deep, detailed understanding of legal terminology, industry-specific language, and regional differences that AI algorithms may not capture. This contextual understanding allows them to refine search criteria based on specific client needs and industry trends.

Evaluation of Results: AI can process large datasets quickly but cannot analyze results in context. Human professionals can assess search results, filter out irrelevant data, and identify valuable information that AI might miss due to its reliance on predefined algorithms.

Flexibility and Adaptability

 Adaptability to Complex Queries: AI-powered search tools may struggle with complex or new queries that require adaptive thinking and creative problem-solving, skills in which human professionals excel. Human experts can modify their strategies and decision-making processes in real time to adapt to new trends and technologies. As a result, AI-based search tools offer unique advantages compared to traditional human methods.

Tailored Approaches: Every IPR search presents a unique scenario, calling for a tailored approach that considers individual client objectives, legal differences, and industry nuances. Our team of experts excels at adapting search strategies on the fly, incorporating the latest data & making adjustments as needed.

Ethical and Legal Considerations

 Ethical Standards: Professionals in the human workforce adhere to ethical standards such as confidentiality, privacy, and unbiased reporting, which are crucial in Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) searches involving sensitive information. This is a valuable skill that, with substantial human input, can enhance the effectiveness of AI. There are still concerns about using AI solutions for patent searches because they involve third-party providers or cloud services. This raises concerns about who can access confidential patent information and how the data is stored, transmitted, and protected throughout the search process.

Legal Interpretation: IPR searches often require navigating intricate legal frameworks and precedents. Human experts are skilled in interpreting legal documents, understanding case law, and applying legal principles to IPR search queries. This is a crucial skill that, with significant human input, can greatly complement and enhance AI capabilities.

 Advanced and Specialized Queries

 Quality Assurance: When it comes to manual searches, expect a meticulous process with rigorous peer review and validation, guaranteeing exceptional quality at every stage. Human experts can cross-check findings, verify accuracy, and provide additional insights that enhance the overall reliability of search results. Remembering the importance of connecting with the client and putting myself in the shoes of someone searching for a patent will significantly influence how we think and develop strategies for finding relevant prior art. This approach allows for creative thinking and problem-solving. In contrast, an AI-based model relies solely on predefined trained models and data, limiting its ability to think creatively and provide high-quality results.

Conclusion:

 Many people fear that AI could replace human jobs, but AI-based search tools offer benefits in speed and scalability and help save money.”Although AI has made great strides, human experts still have the upper hand in specific areas, like intellectual property rights. The ability to understand detailed contexts, interpret complex legal and industry-specific information, and adapt strategies in real time are critical capabilities that human professionals bring to the table.” By harnessing the power of AI as a valuable assistant instead of a substitute for human knowledge, IPR professionals can combine the best of both worlds to provide in-depth, precise, and ethically responsible solutions that cater to the varied requirements of clients in the ever-changing global market

AUTHOR:  SAHIL RATHOUR, PATENT RESEARCH ANALYST

Categories
FARMING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Patents

Empowering Farmers: The Impact of AI Technology on Agriculture and Horticulture

Food is essential for life. It is a fundamental requirement for humans, animals, birds, insects, and all other living beings. Everyone needs to eat, but no one wants to produce. This imbalance creates a challenge: the demand for food continues to grow, but the willingness and capacity to generate it need to catch up.

As the global population increases, the demand for food “is projected” to rise significantly, which could lead to potential food shortages in the future. “To address this issue.”, it is crucial to integrate technology into the agriculture sector.

Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology plays a pivotal role in the growth of various sectors, including agriculture and horticulture. In a country like India, where a significant portion of the population depends on these sectors, AI technology can significantly enhance production efficiency and boost the income of farmers and orchardists. This article explores how AI-based technology is revolutionizing agriculture and horticulture in India by addressing challenges and introducing innovative solutions.

Enhancing Production Efficiency

AI technology helps increase production efficiency by providing farmers with precise and timely information. AI-powered tools and systems can analyze vast amounts of data to offer insights into crop health, soil conditions, and weather patterns. This information allows farmers to make informed decisions, optimize resource use, and improve crop yields.

Improving Farmers’ Income

By improving production efficiency and cutting costs., AI technology directly impacts farmers’ income. Automation and AI-driven machinery lessen the need for manual labor, allowing farmers to focus on more strategic aspects of farming. Moreover, AI can help farmers access better markets and fair prices by analyzing market trends and demand patterns.

Solving Farmers’ Problems

“Farmers are benefiting from cutting-edge AI technologies designed to tackle a wide range of challenges in agriculture.” For example, crop monitoring robots equipped with AI can identify diseases, pests, and nutrient deficiencies early, enabling timely intervention. Soil testing using AI helps determine the exact nutrient requirements, ensuring optimal growth conditions for crops.

Current AI-Based Technologies in Use

Several AI-based technologies “Currently, we are employed.” in the agriculture and horticulture sectors in India:

Crop Monitoring Robots: These robots use AI to monitor crop health, identify issues, and suggest corrective measures.

Crop Cycle Management: AI helps farmers plan and manage crop cycles efficiently, ensuring maximum productivity.

Soil Testing: AI-powered soil testing devices provide accurate and quick examination of soil health, helping farmers make informed decisions about fertilization and irrigation.

Field Automation: Automation of field operations, such as planting, watering, and harvesting, is made possible through AI, reducing labor costs and increasing efficiency.

Market analysis: AI tools analyze market trends, aiding farmers in understanding demand and price fluctuations to make better marketing decisions.

Fertilizer Drones:  AI-enabled drones can precisely apply fertilizers to crops, ensuring even distribution and optimal usage. These drones use data on crop health and soil conditions to determine the precise amount of fertilizer needed, reducing waste and environmental impact.

The Future of AI in Agriculture: Centralized Systems

The continual use of AI technology improves the system, making it more intelligent and effective. Keep this in mind: In the future, we might see AI-powered centralized systems linking production and distribution processes. Such systems would play a significant role in material management and reducing crop waste due to improper distribution. By ensuring a seamless connection between production and distribution, AI can help:

Price Control: A centralized system can monitor supply and demand, helping stabilize prices. Farmers and end-users benefit from fair pricing, reducing the exploitation of both parties.

Reducing Waste: Effective material management is crucial in ensuring that our delicious crops are scattered wisely, minimizing the amount of produce that goes to waste.”

By harnessing: the power of AI to predict demand and optimize supply chains, we can effectively meet market needs and prevent shortages or oversupply, ensuring a smooth and efficient fulfillment process.

Conclusion

AI technology is transforming the agriculture and horticulture sectors in India. By improving production efficiency, increasing farmers’ income, and offering innovative solutions to common problems, AI is paving the way for a more sustainable and prosperous future for Indian farmers. As AI continues to evolve, its impact on agriculture and horticulture will only grow, driving further growth and development in these crucial sectors. The future of AI in agriculture looks promising, with the potential for centralized systems to revolutionize how production and

“Efficient task management brings benefits to both farmers and consumers.”

AUTHOR: NIKHIL SHARMA, PATENT RESEARCH ANALYST

Categories
FARMING ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Patents

From Field to Sky: How Drones Are Transforming Indian Farming Methods


In today’s world, drone technology is rapidly advancing and has widespread applications. Agriculture in India is the main occupation for over 60% of people and is essential for the Indian economy. Utilizing the latest technologies is crucial for enhancing the efficiency and productivity of agriculture and horticulture. Drone technology is playing a significant role in the field of agriculture and horticulture. This new technology brings many benefits, such as improved efficiency and better management of crops. The Indian government is also investing in drone technology because they want their farmers to use technology to improve their production and make their work easier. Here’s how drones are revolutionizing the field of horticulture and agriculture.

Precision Agriculture:
One of the most significant advantages of drones in agriculture is their role in precision agriculture. This approach involves using technology to monitor and manage crop growth, ensuring that each plant receives optimal care.

Crop Monitoring and Health Assessment
Drones equipped with advanced sensors and cameras can capture high-resolution images of crops. “These images can reveal clues about disease, pest issues, and water stress.” By identifying these issues early, farmers can take targeted action to address problems, potentially saving entire crops from devastation.

Soil and Field Analysis
Before planting, farmers can use drones to make detailed 3D maps of their fields. These maps help farmers understand the differences in soil conditions across their land. By knowing the exact soil health and topography, farmers can decide where to plant specific crops and how to manage their fields for the best yield.

Efficient Resource Management
“Harnessing the power of drones in agriculture can revolutionize how we use resources, bringing about cost savings and environmental advantages.”

Irrigation Management
Water is a precious resource in agriculture. Drones can identify areas within fields that require more or less water, enabling farmers to optimize their irrigation systems. This precision ensures that crops receive the right amount of water, reducing waste and improving crop health.

Fertilizer and Pesticide Application
Traditionally, fertilizers and pesticides are applied uniformly across fields, regardless of the specific needs of different areas. Drones can address this inefficiency by enabling variable-rate applications. “By applying the right amount of fertilizer or pesticide exactly where needed, drones help reduce chemical use and minimize environmental impact. It’s a win-win for agriculture and the environment!”

Enhancing Crop Production
Drones offer innovative solutions to enhance crop production and improve overall farm management.

Planting and Seeding
Did you know that certain drones can plant seeds directly into the soil? This method is beneficial for reforestation projects and growing in hard-to-reach areas. Drone planting can significantly reduce the time and labor required for these tasks, making it a cost-effective solution for large-scale operations.

Crop Spraying
Drones can efficiently spray crops over large areas with precision. This method saves time, ensures even application of fertilizers and pesticides, and reduces human exposure to harmful chemicals.

Data Collection and Analysis
The data collected by drones provide valuable insights that can drive better decision-making and long-term planning in agriculture.

Yield Prediction and Analysis
By analyzing images and data collected throughout the growing season, drones can help predict crop yields. This information allows farmers to plan for harvest, storage, and market supply more effectively.

Seasonal Monitoring
Drones can conduct regular surveys of fields, providing continuous monitoring throughout the growing season. This consistent data collection helps farmers track crop development, assess the effectiveness of interventions, and make adjustments as needed.

Conclusion
Drone technology is rapidly transforming the fields of horticulture and agriculture. By enabling precision agriculture, efficient resource management, enhanced crop production, and robust data collection, drones are helping farmers increase yields, reduce costs, and promote sustainable practices. As this technology continues to evolve, its impact on agriculture will only grow, paving the way for a more efficient and sustainable future in farming.

AUTHOR:  DEEPAK SHARMA, PATENT RESEARCH ANALYST

Categories
Patents

Empowering Agriculture: How AI is Reshaping Farming in India

Food is a fundamental necessity for all living beings. With the global population projected to increase significantly, the demand for food is expected to rise, potentially leading to future food shortages. Integrating technology into the agriculture sector is crucial to address this impending challenge.

“Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology is instrumental in various sectors, including agriculture and horticulture. “In countries like India, where a substantial portion of the population relies on these sectors, AI has the potential to significantly enhance production efficiency and increase the income of farmers and orchardists. This article explores how AI-based technology is transforming agriculture and horticulture in India by tackling challenges and introducing innovative solutions.

 Enhancing Production Efficiency

AI technology significantly boosts production efficiency by providing farmers with precise and timely information. AI-powered tools can analyze large datasets to offer insights into crop health, soil conditions, and weather patterns. This valuable information empowers farmers to make informed decisions, optimize resource use, and improve crop yields.

Improving Farmers’ Income

AI technology directly impacts farmers’ income by enhancing production efficiency and reducing costs. Automation and AI-driven machinery minimize the need for manual labor, allowing farmers to focus on strategic aspects of farming. Moreover, AI helps farmers access better markets and fair prices by analyzing market trends and demand patterns.

Solving Farmers’ Challenges

“AI-based solutions are revolutionizing farming by addressing the diverse challenges that farmers encounter.” For example, AI-powered crop-monitoring robots can detect diseases, pests, and nutrient deficiencies early, enabling prompt intervention. AI-driven soil testing provides accurate nutrient analysis, ensuring optimal crop growth conditions.

Current AI-Based Technologies in Use

AI-driven technologies have already revolutionized India’s agricultural and horticultural sectors.

  • Crop Monitoring Robots: Utilize AI to monitor crop health and recommend corrective actions.
  • Crop Cycle Management: Assist farmers in efficiently planning and managing crop cycles for maximum productivity.
  • Soil Testing: AI-powered devices offer rapid and precise Examination of soil health, aiding decisions on fertilization and irrigation.
  • Field Automation: Automate planting, watering, and harvesting operations through AI, reducing labor costs and improving efficiency.
  • Market Analysis: AI tools analyze market trends to help farmers understand demand and price fluctuations, enabling better marketing decisions.
  • Fertilizer Drones: AI-enabled drones apply fertilizers precisely based on crop and soil data, minimizing waste and environmental impact.
The Future of AI in Agriculture: Centralized Systems

Continuous use of AI technology enhances system intelligence and efficiency. Future AI-based centralized systems could integrate production and distribution processes, significantly improving material management and reducing crop wastage. These systems could:

  • Control Pricing: Monitor supply and demand to stabilize prices and ensure fairness for farmers and consumers.
  • Reduce Waste: Efficiently manage crop distribution to minimize wastage.
  • Meet Demand: Predict market demand accurately and manage supply chains to prevent shortages or oversupply.
Conclusion

AI technology is transforming India’s agriculture and horticulture sectors by enhancing production efficiency, increasing farmers’ income, and introducing innovative solutions to traditional challenges. As AI evolves distant, its impact on these sectors will continue to grow, fostering sustainable development and prosperity. The future of AI in agriculture holds promise, mainly through centralized systems that could revolutionize production and distribution management, benefiting stakeholders across the food supply chain.

 

AUTHOR:   NIKHIL SHARMA, PATENT RESEARCH ANALYST

Categories
Patents

Can claims be substituted in Inter Partes Review?

In ex parte re-examination , and more recently in inter partes re-examination , a owner facing dismissal on legislative grounds by an inspector will apply revised claims for further examination by the USPTO in a procedure close to that of amending claims during the initial . Congress made some critical changes to the Act in 2012, the enactment of AIA (America Invents Act). One reform was the implementation of an inter partes examination (‘IPR’) -produced to contest the legitimacy of granted as an affordable method for a third party. Making it from examinational to adjudicatory. The owner has to follow a procedure during these post-grant hearings to amend the grounds of the disputed , also known as ‘substituting’ claims.

While allowed under the law, the owners’ several attempts to replace the claims have been largely unsuccessful during IPR. As of October 1, 2016, there were just five successful motions to change the IPR proposal for replacement claims. Claim amendments in inter partes review have many overlapping similarities with amendments in re-examination . For example, in all cases, the owner is forbidden to broaden the scope of the initial claims or to add new matters, the amendments must respond to the prior art, the modified claims are not considered to be true as the claims of the lawsuit, and the intervening rights are available if the scope of the amended claim is not “substantially identical” to that of the original claim. A much more important difference between the modifications in the re-examination and the others in IPR is the burden of proof. In the case of re-examination, as in the case of ordinary , it is for the examiner to “make a thorough investigation of the available prior art relating to the subject matter of the claimed invention.” The examiner must then clearly explain the basis for each claim rejection. In IPR, there is no examiner involved. Once a prima facie case has been established by the owner that the proposed substitute claims are patentable, the burden transfers to the petitioner who can either contradict the prima facie case by way of the argument or look for additional prior art, making the proposed substitute claims unpatentable.

In Nike Incorporated v. Adidas AG1, the Federal Circuit rejected the argument that “inter partes review … the petitioner shall have the burden of proving a proposition of unpatentability”, and held that, the patent owner carries some affirmative duty to justify substitute claims. Putting the burden on the owner of the patent to justify right to a substitute claims are compatible with the fundamental intent of IPRs-to provide a more effective and simplified patent mechanism that increases the accuracy of and eliminates needless and counterproductive costs of . The rules allow owners to restrict their possible amendment claims to those which are both necessary and more obviously patentable in relation to the prior art by giving the patent owner only a single opportunity to file a petition for amendment. This claim modification procedure would not allow a full remodelling of the claim system, unlike re-examination.

The proprietor of the patent shall clarify in depth the prior art lessons as they apply to the additional restrictions and also explain how the invention becomes distinguishable from the prior art in the proposed claims. Sometimes, this responsibility is underestimated or mistaken. In HTC Corp. v. Specialized Audio Equipment, LLC2, the patent owner argued that in its petition to amend, it could not reasonably address them all with almost 200 prior art record references. Although the patent proprietor may have been correct about the feasibility of addressing a reference to the prior art, it is not what the PTAB demands and held that, “no effort was made to discuss the state of the art as of [the priority] date, or provide any prior art references beyond those already of record that might be material to the added limitations.”.

A requirement was laid down in Idle Free Systems, Inc3. case for dependent proposed claims that, “the patent owner should provide meaningful reasons for additional modifications to dependent claims”. There are also cases when PTAB it denied motions to amend dependent substitute claims with additional modifications by analyzing the dependent claims by “assum[ing] the parent claims to be prior art.”

When IPRs is adopted as an adjudicative method by Congress to replace the re-examination patent owners should be mindful of the considerable variations between amending claims in a re-examination and replacing claims in an IPR. The patent owner, as the moving party, carries the burden of demonstrating a patentable difference between each new replacement claim and the prior art while pursuing an amendment to the IPR. This duty of showing that the owner of the patent is entitled to substitution claims is important, and numerous efforts to replace claims during the IPR have been largely unsuccessful. By adhering to the criteria set out by the PTAB and upheld by the Federal Circuit in recent rulings, patent owners will increase their odds of successful claim modifications.

Categories
Patents

Forum Shopping in Patent Cases

Despite the pending high-profile withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the EU and growing Euroscepticism around the continent, the EU is determined with its plans to unify patent lawsuits into a consolidated system of courts, ahead. The Unified Patent Court, the current structure, aims to foster “uniformity of the legal order of the Union and the primacy of European Union law.” To achieve this goal, UPC contains a range of regulations aimed at curbing a growing concern affecting jurisdictions around the world: in patent litigation, forum shopping. Over the last two decades, the new European and U.S. system have seen a spike in forum shopping, leading to increased appeals, increased legal expenses, decreased litigation clarity, and the over-concentration of patent proceedings in only a few forums.
The “forum shopping” method encourages patent owners to file infringement suits in courts considered to be complainant-friendly, which easily brings lawsuits to trial and helps to create more favourable jury verdicts. In the other hand, patent owners have opposed venue change because they claim it is yet another way for infringers to avoid punishment by barring them from federal courts where they can get a reasonable trial against richer and more dominant infringers of the company.
Under the patent venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1400 (b), “[a]ny civil action for patent infringement may be brought in the judicial district where the defendant resides, or where the defendant has committed acts of infringement and has a regular and established place of business.”[1] The US Code also contains a broader venue statute, 28 U.S.C. § 1391, which states “[e]xcept as otherwise provided by law” and “[f]or all venue purposes,” a corporation “shall be deemed to reside, if a defendant, in any judicial district in which such defendant is subject to the court’s personal jurisdiction with respect to the civil action in question.”[2]
A federal appeals court found in VE Holding Corp. v. Johnson Gas Appliance Co.[3] , that the residence rule in the statute of the general venue must take precedence over the regulation of the statute of the patent venue. This harmless decision allowed claimants in every court where the defendant had any involvement, however tenuous, to institute violation suits. This has resulted in a growing tide of ‘patent trolls’ or non-practicing companies, who now had a relatively simple model for embroiling claimants in lawsuits and obtaining from them settlements or even penalties. This was way back in the early 2000s.
On December 14, 2016, in TC Heartland LLC v. Kraft Foods[4], the High Court decided to reconsider a Federal Circuit ruling in which the Federal Circuit upheld the long-standing tradition of allowing patent suits to be brought in every judicial district in which an allegedly infringing device was marketed by the defendant. In May 2017, the Supreme Court ruled in favour of Heartland, holding unanimously that only in the state where they are incorporated can corporations be sued for patent infringement. It is too early to say what TC Heartland would mean in the long term, but at least it was the Supreme Court’s attempt to minimise forum shopping and improve uniformity and predictability at the district-court level in patent proceedings.
In a case merely because of the choice of forum, Congress and judges have acted with court orders, laws, or public policy to discourage litigants from shopping sites, and to make the justice system predictable, clear, and fair if there is a way for the claimant or defendant to get a particular result in a case. It is unreasonable for the USPTO to encourage a patent drafter to merely modify a few terms without altering the subject matter of the application and to categorise the application more favourably. Big data and text processing make it very easy for patent drafters to enter a drafted application into a text editor with recent technological developments and get a forecast on where the USPTO will categorise the application. More concepts and approaches that would make the classification of an application even more dependent on its subject matter and less dependent on how creatively it is drawn up should be implemented. Such initiatives will improve uniformity and predictability thus, discouraging the drafting of artful patents.

Categories
Patents

Importance of Patent Linkage in pandemic

The outbreak of Covid-19 has set the eyes of the world towards finding a suitable vaccine for the virus. This prevailing situation has made various countries to re-think some of the most pressing issues with regard to the regulation. linkage is perhaps one of the most debatable aspects of regulation around the world.

The system of ‘ linkage’ refers to the practice of linking the market approval of the generic product to the status of the innovator’s product. It involves the regulatory body, granting market access, and the office, granting rights to the patentee. If there being an existing patent on the subject drug then the regulatory authority can refrain from providing market approval to the generic manufacturer. This denial often concerns the availability of generic drugs being subjected to such preceding conditions irrespective of any proven affecting the larger issues of access to medicine and in the larger picture, the public health issue.

US’s Hatch Waxman Act brings the linkage regime into force for the explicit need to balance the brand pharmaceuticals firms and the generic firm for the purpose of bringing cheaper medicine “as soon as possible”. The US publishes the Orange Book containing all the approved drugs having the same Therapeutic Evaluation. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) updates the list of all the drugs and provides the exclusivity information and all the industry while filing for the Abbreviated New Drug Application (ANDA) must show the drug has been used and its expiration. Claims made for favoring linkage regulations imply providing incentives to originator firms making high risk in research and development. The US has favorably insisted on the linkage regulation in its various free trade agreements, and even to the extent, some Asian Countries have amended their local laws to insert the linkage clause. China, South Korea, Singapore being some along with Taiwan being the latest entrant in 2019.

European Union does not have a system of linkage. There were instances where various industries have tried to introduce such provision but they failed and even in a 2006 press release, the European Generic Medicines Association had stated that linkage is contrary to EU regulatory law as it undermined the Bolar provision which sought to encourage quick access to the post-market for EU generic medicines.

Linkage shifts the onus of regulating the from the holder to the regulatory authority. Some previous research claimed that linkage is generally used for delaying the entry of generic drugs, especially by major pharmaceuticals companies following the tendency for positive incentives and reward. But the primary problem might not be linkage as a whole but the nexus between the regulatory authority and office, of which regulatory authority having no expertise, unnecessarily delays the generic entry without proven.

This pandemic does make us realize the importance of not only cheap medicines but also rapid access to medicines. Prompt and affordable access to essential medicines is a component of all domestic and public health models and barring the generic drugs is doctrinally weak which prejudices the historical, epistemological, and jurisprudential foundation of intellectual property.

Categories
Patents

Patent Eligibility: A CRI analysis of US and India

Introduction

Intellectual property (IP) rights are incentives that fuel innovation and creativity in our ecosystem, however, they are not universal. laws are territorial in nature, hence something patentable in the US may not get protection in India and vice versa. Therefore, it is highly probable that when any invention falls outside the eligibility compartments established under the patent law, it is not patentable. The US judiciary with Alice Corp. v. CLS Bank, S. Ct. (2014), had interpreted the patent eligibility criteria in a narrower sense w.r.t computer-related inventions (CRI). while the Indian Judiciary with Ferid Allani v. Union of India has widened the scope of patentability. This write-up analyzes the repercussions of Alice’s case, and compares and contrasts the CRI in India and the US.

The Building Blocks

With Alice’s case, the Court limited the patent eligibility standards under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for CRI. It applied the mayo test in the context of software. The Supreme Court in Mayo v. Prometheus (2012) a judicial exception of ‘Law of Nature’ that applied besides the novelty and obviousness patent eligibility criteria. The two-step test (1) applied in Alice’s case held that the mere application of abstract ideas using the software will not make a patentable. The narrowing down could be taken as a step to trim off unreasonable CRI applications pending with the USPTO. However, this was done without specifying what would amount to an abstract idea. Now, the task was to show that the invention, however, built on an abstract idea is more than just the idea itself. This inevitably introduced uncertainty within the concerned industry.

The Infused Uncertainty

With Alice’s decision, the invention industry felt a shockwave as the Court had been strict while interpreting the patent eligibility thresholds. Below mentioned are a few repercussions of the decision that significantly affected the predictability of software .
1. An invention to secure a had to pass the threshold of the trinity of novelty, prior art, and non-obviousness. However, with this decision, the courts stepped in to analyzing the scope of claims. This allows the Courts to inspect even the technical aspects of a claim.
2. In the Post-Alice environment, it is a struggle to secure a for a software-related invention because now the USPTO will reject a CRI blueprint unless it specifically mentions the procedure used to travel from the ‘functionally’ to ‘the code written to achieve this functionality’. In other words, a CRI to get a must lie somewhere in between the claimed functionalities and the code, and this makes describing a CRI a challenging task.
3. On a conjoint reading of the above, it becomes apparent that the business models, engaged in aggregating known parameters/functionalities and making them available in one e-frame, are struggling the most to get a .
4. Undoubtedly, computer software fuels the engine of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, but the distractions surrounding USPTO and lower courts have increased the cost and decreased the quality of a .
5. In 2019, the USPTO attempted to clear the confusion associated with Alice’s decision by issuing guidelines to explain the evaluation process of the claims for eligibility under 35 U.S.C. 101.

The Crossover Journey of CRI patenting

The jurisprudence of computer-related inventions getting patent protection in India is now moving in a direction where it may cross path with the US regime, to some extent. The recent Delhi High Court decision in Ferid Allani v. Union of India interpreted section 3(k) of the Indian Patent Act in the light of the 2016 Guidelines indicating the patentability of CRI in India. It was held that “per se”, in sec. 3(k), should not disturb the patentability of genuine computer-based inventions. This judgment overnight changed the fate of CRI in India, now we have moved from a complete ban to a bit relaxed regime providing room for genuine CRI. The Court observed that the ‘technical contributions shall be examined before rejecting a CRI patent application’. But again, it did not address which inventions can be said to reflect ‘technical contribution’.
The US patent law does not prohibit computer-related inventions to secure patent rights unless otherwise disqualified, on the contrary, the Indian patent law, prior to Ferid Allani’s case, specifically bars CRI from patentability. The US innovation sector after Alice’s decision has faced threats of uncertainty. Meanwhile, in India, Ferid Allani’s decision to some extent has brought certainty and hope for inventors of CRI. In other words, with the judicial interpretation, in the US many pending patent applications were rejected while in India many applications may become eligible for a patent.

Conclusion

The patentability of a CRI, apart from the statue’s requirements, now largely depends on the quality of the patent application and the intelligent of patent claims. These swards help an inventor to successfully defend her case in the courts. It is worth noting that even after roughly six years of Alice’s case the confusion surrounding the subject matter eligibility is deteriorated and hampered the speed invention, now that we are in the age of machine learning and IoT. The economy demands a categorically clear picture regarding the CRI patenting regime owing to the financial aspects of .