"The Federal Circuit's 2022 decision in Thaler v. Vidal seemed to settle a fundamental question: only natural persons can be inventors under U.S. patent law. But, the bigger near-term question has always been about human-AI collaboration - and what level of human contribution is sufficient to qualify as inventive. Director Kathi Vidal implemented a team-based framework that allowed patenting if the human made a "more than insignificant contribution" to the invention."
"In a November 2025 guidance, new USPTO Director John Squires has rejected the Vidal approach and instead established a "don't ask, don't tell" policy for AI-assisted inventions creates a presumption of human inventorship so long as any natural person is willing to sign the oath. For all practical purposes, this approach is also a repudiation of Thaler, so long as the patent applicant is able to find a human close to the invention willing to self-identify as the inventor."
The Federal Circuit's 2022 decision in Thaler v. Vidal held that only natural persons can be inventors under U.S. patent law. Human-AI collaboration raised the question of what level of human contribution counts as inventive. Director Kathi Vidal adopted a team-based test permitting patents when a human made a "more than insignificant contribution." In November 2025 new USPTO Director John Squires rejected that framework and instituted a "don't ask, don't tell" presumption of human inventorship whenever any natural person will sign the oath. The new policy permits unverifiable human attribution and enables someone to step forward as inventor even when AI played a central role.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]