Insights

On November 4, 2025, the USPTO in Ex parte Desjardins designated as precedential an earlier Appeals Review Panel (ARP) decision overruling the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (Board), instead holding that claims directed to training a machine learning model are patent-eligible under 35 U.S.C. § 101 when they integrate a mathematical concept into a practical application that improves how the model operates. That precedential designation represents a material shift in legal precedent in the § 101 arena post-Alice, and it has already driven updates to the MPEP and examiner practice. As a result, Desjardins signals an adjustment in practice in favor of AI and software eligibility at the USPTO.

On Friday, May 9, 2025, the U.S. Copyright Office released the third (pre-publication) installment in a series of reports regarding the intersection of artificial intelligence (AI) and copyright law.[1]  This report addresses the legal implications of training generative AI models using copyrighted materials.[2] 

Examiner interviews are an optional but important and effective part of patent examination process that are beneficially conducted early and, in some cases, more than once during patent prosecution.  Interviews are in-person, telephone or online conferences between the Examiner and the patent attorney or patent agent representing the patent applicant. When conducted early in the patent examination process, interviews may reduce the time required to obtain a patent and increase the odds of obtaining an allowance.  As discussed below, interviews can help foster a cooperative interaction with the examiner to supercharge the prosecution process.