The USPTO’s recent memorandum on Rule 132 Subject Matter Eligibility Declarations puts a sharper lens on a familiar but often underdeveloped argument in AI, software and biotechnology patent prosecution: whether the claimed invention improves technology rather than merely using a computer to reach a desired result. The agency is not creating a separate patentability regime for AI. It is asking applicants to connect eligibility arguments to technical facts already disclosed in the application.For applicants, the practical message is direct. Describing an AI model that classifies, predicts,...

On July 1, 2026, the U.S. Copyright Office released new practical guidance on how the DMCA notice-and-takedown framework should operate when the disputed material is AI-generated, deepfaked, or synthetically performed. The point that stands out is not that automation has become irrelevant. It is that platforms cannot treat an automated assessment of “possible fair use” as a substitute for substantive review when a copyright complaint is already on the table.The sharper compliance risk appears at the counter-notice stage. According to the guidance, if the uploader disputes the takedown and...

According to a USPTO announcement and Ghanaian reporting published on 14 July, the Ghana Industrial Property Office (GHIPO), under the Office of the Registrar of Companies, and the United States Patent and Trademark Office signed a statement of intent in Geneva on 9 July 2026 concerning an Accelerated Patent Grant (APG) arrangement. Ghana is the first African country to move forward with this type of cooperation with the USPTO. Under the proposed mechanism, an applicant holding a granted US patent and a corresponding Ghanaian application may request accelerated grant in Ghana, while GHIPO...

Taylor Swift’s team has recently filed U.S. trademark applications tied to distinctive voice clips and a stage image, a move widely seen as an attempt to get ahead of the growing misuse of AI deepfakes. As voice cloning, fake endorsements and highly realistic synthetic images become easier to produce, copyright and post-hoc takedowns often do not fully solve the problem. Pushing recognisable vocal and visual identifiers into trademark law is less about turning every personal trait into a mark, and more about building a stronger legal theory around source, confusion and misleading commercial...

The USPTO has sent its information collection request for the Native American Tribal Insignia Database to the Office of Management and Budget for review, while continuing to invite public comment on the collection. According to the agency’s notice, the database records official insignia properly submitted by federally or state-recognized Native American tribes and serves as a reference point in trademark examination, especially when the Office assesses whether a mark may falsely suggest a connection under Section 2(a) of the Trademark Act. This round is framed as an extension and revision...

On May 9, 2025, the U.S. Copyright Office released the pre-publication version of Copyright and Artificial Intelligence, Part 3: Generative AI Training. The report does not endorse either extreme. It does not say all AI training is infringement, and it does not offer a blanket fair use safe harbor. Instead, it pushes the analysis back to the facts that matter: what was copied, how the material was obtained, whether licensing markets exist, and how the use affects rightsholders in practice. For AI companies, that is a meaningful shift. Large-scale scraping is now much harder to frame as a...

One of the most common ways this USPTO story is now described is also one of the least accurate. The Office did propose a major change in May 2024 that would have tied obviousness-type double patenting (ODP) and terminal disclaimer practice much more tightly together. Under that proposal, a patent linked through a terminal disclaimer could have faced serious enforceability consequences if a related patent in the chain ended up with a claim finally held unpatentable or invalid over prior art. But that proposal never became an effective final rule.The date that matters is December 4, 2024. On...

The U.S. Copyright Office is pushing AI use in creative work out of the realm of vague disclosure and into something far more structured. Under its updated registration approach, applicants are expected to draw a clearer line between the parts of a work authored by a human and the parts generated by AI, whether the material is text, images, audio, or a mixed-format output.The practical importance goes well beyond one more compliance step. Since 2023, the Office has required applicants to disclose more than a de minimis amount of AI-generated material and to describe the human author’s...

The USPTO has formally finalized a rule that will make late corrective petitions in patent matters harder once the delay runs past one year. Published in the Federal Register on June 24, 2026 and effective August 13, 2026, the rule lowers the point at which the Office will require a fuller factual showing from two years to one. It reaches more than abandoned applications: delayed priority or benefit claims, unintentionally delayed maintenance fee payments, and missed time limits in Hague international design matters are all in scope.This is not just a procedural tweak for outlier cases. It...

On July 2, the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office issued a memorandum aimed squarely at expert testimony in PTAB proceedings. The immediate point is not that AI tools are forbidden. It is that expert declarations containing claim charts, technical comparisons, infringement-style mappings, or data extrapolations assisted by large language models and similar tools must now be accompanied by a sworn statement of independent verification.The memorandum matters because it reframes AI use as an evidentiary reliability issue, not merely a drafting issue. If the extent of AI involvement is not...

The USPTO’s final rule requiring foreign-domiciled patent applicants and patent owners to act through a registered patent practitioner takes effect on 20 July 2026. Where at least one applicant or owner is domiciled outside the United States or its territories, most patent filings and prosecution steps must be handled by a patent attorney, patent agent, or other practitioner recognised by the USPTO and in good standing. The rule applies to new applications and to many papers received on or after the effective date, including amendments, replies, information disclosure statements,...

As of June 18, 2026, the USPTO has moved the Open Data Portal (ODP) fully into an account-based access model. On paper, that looks like a security and traffic-management change aimed at unregistered bulk access. In practice, it is more than that. The agency is starting to separate ordinary public use from industrial-scale extraction of patent data, and it is doing so through identity, registration, and controllable access.The more consequential signal for patent teams is that AI-assisted drafting is getting harder to treat as a routine productivity layer. Once generative AI is used in...

A USPTO decision disclosed on 3 May tightens the link between inter partes review and ex parte reexamination. The key point is the timing of estoppel under 35 U.S.C. § 315(e)(1): a request for reexamination is not treated merely as a filing made on a particular day, but as a pending request that continues until the Office orders reexamination under 35 U.S.C. § 304.That reading narrows a familiar strategy: challenge the patent first through IPR, then use ex parte reexamination as a second route if the IPR record begins to look unfavourable. If the IPR final written decision has already...

The UK conversation around bad-faith stockpiling and “zombie” marks is not just a passing enforcement headline. The verifiable public materials point to a broader tightening. After SkyKick, UKIPO told examiners to look actively at specifications that are manifestly and self-evidently broad, and from 1 April 2026 the forms and fees for revocation and invalidation have also been updated. The practical message is that the UK system is becoming less tolerant of filings built to occupy space first and justify business use later.Across the Atlantic, the PTAB story should also be framed...

In an Official Gazette notice dated April 1, 2026, the USPTO introduced a new procedure for ex parte reexamination requests: before the Office determines under 35 U.S.C. 303(a) whether the request raises a substantial new question of patentability (SNQ), the patent owner may file a pre-order paper without a separate petition and without paying a fee. The submission is intended to help the Office assess why the argued teaching(s) in the request should not be considered sufficient to raise an SNQ at the threshold stage. The paper is generally limited to 30 pages, must be filed within 30 days...

By late March 2026, two USPTO workflow changes around Patent Center had moved from announcement to live operating reality. Effective March 9, the Automated Interview Request (AIR) form was relocated into Patent Center and is now submitted from the Existing Submissions menu. On the same effective date, courtesy ceremonial paper copies of eGrants stopped being automatic and became opt-in when the issue fee is paid. For law firms, portfolio managers and applicants that rely on stable internal routing, these are not cosmetic changes. They alter where routine procedural action actually...

Federal policy on AI deepfakes took a meaningful step forward in late June 2026. The NO FAKES Act has now moved through the Senate Judiciary Committee process, and the latest text makes clear that Congress is no longer treating unauthorized synthetic voice and likeness only as a niche celebrity problem. The bill is built around a new federal right to control digital replicas of one’s voice and visual likeness, reflecting the U.S. Copyright Office’s repeated conclusion that existing law does not adequately address realistic, unauthorized AI-generated impersonation.For platforms, the more...

In its opening statement to the 68th WIPO Assemblies on 8 July 2026, the United States placed the modernisation of global filing systems high on the agenda. It urged WIPO members to remove outdated requirements in the Madrid System that limit its usefulness for trademark owners, and argued that resources generated through the PCT should be reinvested in the system, including a unified dashboard and portal for managing global intellectual property portfolios with a particular focus on small and medium-sized enterprises. These were policy proposals from one member state, not adopted WIPO...

On March 19, 2026, the U.S. Copyright Office announced in NewsNet that it would publish a proposed rule in the Federal Register to seek public comment on adjustments to its fee schedule. The proposed rule was published on March 20, 2026, and written comments are due by May 4, 2026, at 11:59 p.m. Eastern Time. The notice launches a new round of public debate over the pricing of copyright registration, recordation, and related administrative services.This is not simply a routine pricing update. The Office explained that it reviews and updates fees every few years, with the last adjustment...

On March 20, 2026, the White House released its National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence legislative recommendations, and the section on intellectual property immediately stood out. The document states that the Administration believes training AI models on copyrighted material does not violate U.S. copyright law, while also acknowledging contrary arguments and urging Congress not to interfere with the courts’ resolution of whether such training qualifies as fair use. The framework is notable not only for its pro-innovation tone, but also for the second track it opens. Rather...