直 Japanese PDF Font
  • Our Professionals
  • Our Work
  • Our Insights
  • Offices
  • Firm
  • Careers
Finnegan
  • News
  • Finnegan Facts
  • History
    • Finnegan VISION
    • Finnegan FORWARD
  • Pro Bono
  • Management
    • Pricing & Alternative Fee Arrangements
    • AFA Models We Offer
    • Contingency Fees
    • AI + KM

Commentary

What the Patent Bar Is Saying About the USPTO’s Call for Comments on AI Inventorship

February 19, 2023

IPWatchdog

The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) recently announced that it is requesting public comments on artificial intelligence and inventorship. This move shows that there may be changes as it relates to how the office considers inventions, created or partially created by AI machines.

Finnegan partner Frank DeCosta told IPWatchdog that, “The PTO’s call for comments is an important next step in determining the legal contours surrounding the protection of AI-based IP. The [U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit’s] CAFC’s Thaler decision establishes a bright-line test providing clarity on the front end of the patenting process, but many unanswered questions remain, including those raised by the PTO. The PTO’s call for comments appears to recognize Thaler’s limitations in being able to address the many complex issues surrounding the protection of AI IP.

The record in Thaler was such that the court was able to resolve a pure question of law. That is because the applicant was declared to be AI. The more complex question that the court did not have to confront in this case is what level of reliance on AI in the invention process would deprive a human from having standing to claim inventorship?

Several of the questions posed for comment get at procedural issues regarding what can the PTO do to address the boundaries between human and artificial contributions to inventorship on the record before the PTO during patent prosecution and, in areas where the PTO has authority to act, what should the PTO do in view of the feedback received from the public.”

Related Practices

Trademark and Brand Management

Trademark Counseling and Prosecution

Related Industries

AI, Electronics, and Information Technology

Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Machine Learning (ML)

Related Offices

Washington, DC

Related Professionals

Frank A. DeCosta III, Ph.D.
Partner
Washington, DC
+1 202 408 4012
Email

Related News

Award/Ranking

Finnegan Earns Top Rankings in 2026 IAM Patent 1000 Guide; Nearly 60 Attorneys Ranked

May 28, 2026

Commentary

Quince Aims to Have ‘Dupe’ Evidence Shape Ugg Shoe Patent Trial

May 26, 2026

Commentary

ITC Bars Import of Innoscience Chips Made Before Redesign

May 8, 2026

Commentary

Justices to Side with Generic Drugmakers in Patent Spat, Attorneys Predict

May 5, 2026

Press Release

Pvtech Secures Stay of New Jersey District Court Litigation Following USPTO Institution of All 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Requests Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting

April 28, 2026

Press Release

Pvtech Achieves Perfect Record at USPTO: Institution of All 10 of 10 Ex Parte Reexamination Petitions Against Patents Asserted by Jiaxing Super Lighting

April 24, 2026

Commentary

Heartflow Accuses Rival of Building Competing AI Heart Tech on Stolen Secrets

April 23, 2026

Commentary

‘Efficiency Enhancers, Not Revenue Disruptors’: Lawyers Analyse USPTO’s AI Trademark Tools

April 17, 2026

Commentary

Patent Cases Down 64% YOY at PTAB, up 70% at ITC in Q1 2026

April 15, 2026

Due to international data regulations, we’ve updated our privacy policy. Click here to read our privacy policy in full.

  • Privacy
  • Disclaimer
  • Legal Notices
  • Fraud Alert
  • EEO Statement
  • Cookies
  • Contact Us

© 2026 Finnegan, Henderson, Farabow, Garrett & Dunner, LLP