"Conventional wisdom is that a good certiorari petition needs to show the legal error below and also show why the case is important and timely. The petition follows this dual framing strategy: (1) a doctrinal claim that the Federal Circuit has abandoned preemption as the touchstone of patent eligibility; and (2) a policy argument tied to what I think of as the "new great game" and what the Trump Administration calls "Winning the AI Race." The case also arrives at the Supreme Court as the USPTO has begun to move aggressively toward limiting its use of eligibility in patent prosecution."
"Earlier this year, the Federal Circuit decided its first "do it on AI" case - holding that Recentive Analytics' inventions were ineligible. The key patents at issue focused on training machine learning models for specific applications (event scheduling and network maps). The petition particularly asks whether eligibility doctrine requires model-architecture improvements, whether it is enough to create a practical tool by applying machine learning to new data environments."
Earlier this year the Federal Circuit held that 'do it on AI' claims were patent ineligible, applying that decision to inventions focused on training machine learning models for event scheduling and network mapping. Recentive petitioned the Supreme Court for writ of certiorari, framing the petition to show legal error below and the case's importance. The petition asserts a doctrinal error by arguing the Federal Circuit abandoned preemption as the touchstone of eligibility and advances a policy claim tied to geopolitical competition over AI. The petition asks whether eligibility requires model-architecture improvements or whether applying machine learning to new data environments to create practical tools suffices.
Read at Patently-O
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]