<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/feedblitz_rss.xslt"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0"><channel><title>LJN - Intellectual Property Strategist</title><link>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/</link><description>The Intellectual Property Strategist</description>
<meta xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/the-curious-persistence-of-the-six-factor-trade-secret-test/</feedburner:origLink><title>The Curious Persistence of the Six-Factor Trade Secret Test</title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917573189/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~The-Curious-Persistence-of-the-SixFactor-Trade-Secret-Test/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/the-curious-persistence-of-the-six-factor-trade-secret-test/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:15:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[This two-part article discusses the proof required for information to be considered a trade secret under U.S. statutory law, and includes detailed insight into the six-factor test outlined in the Restatement of Torts. Part One includes the evolving tests for determining a trade secret.<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Richard Rothman </thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573186/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Trade Secrets/Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573186/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573186/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2017/05/trade_secrets2.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This two-part article discusses the proof required for information to be considered a trade secret under U.S. statutory law, and includes detailed insight into the six-factor test outlined in the Restatement of Torts. Part One includes the evolving tests for determining a trade secret.</p><Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917573189/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917573189/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/beyond-the-logo-how-ai-complicates-trademark-protection-in-the-digital-age-/</feedburner:origLink><title>Beyond the Logo: How AI Complicates Trademark Protection In the Digital Age </title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917573195/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~Beyond-the-Logo-How-AI-Complicates-Trademark-Protection-In-the-Digital-Age/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/beyond-the-logo-how-ai-complicates-trademark-protection-in-the-digital-age-/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:13:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Today, building brands solely on the promise of a different product or service has become unsustainable. Any “new and improved” feature or benefit is quickly eclipsed by competitors. Consequently, brands signal category superiority not through rational claims, but by reinforcing a distinct persona — a “<i>ness</i>” comprised of distinguishing traits and behaviors that form an ownable brand essence difficult for competitors to replicate.<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Allen Adamson</thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573192/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Trademarks/Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573192/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573192/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/382/2018/09/trademark2.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[Today, building brands solely on the promise of a different product or service has become unsustainable. Any “new and improved” feature or benefit is quickly eclipsed by competitors. Consequently, brands signal category superiority not through rational claims, but by reinforcing a distinct persona — a “<i>ness</i>” comprised of distinguishing traits and behaviors that form an ownable brand essence difficult for competitors to replicate.<Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917573195/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917573195/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/swearing-behind-overcoming-asserted-prior-art-in-ptab-proceedings/</feedburner:origLink><title>Swearing Behind: Overcoming Asserted Prior Art in PTAB Proceedings</title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917573201/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~Swearing-Behind-Overcoming-Asserted-Prior-Art-in-PTAB-Proceedings/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/swearing-behind-overcoming-asserted-prior-art-in-ptab-proceedings/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:11:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[<b><i>Part One of a Two-Part Article</i></b><br/><br/>This two-part article discusses the various legal and evidentiary requirements for antedating and removing prior art that patent owners should consider when their pre-AIA patents are challenged based on a prior art publication or activity that is not otherwise subject to a statutory bar. It also addresses considerations for petitioners to consider when developing their initial and ongoing invalidity strategies. Part One leads off with a discussion of the evidentiary requirements for proving earlier invention, conception and diligence and actual reduction in practice.<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Emily J. Roberts, Ph.D. and Adam R. Brausa</thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573198/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Patent Licensing and Transactions/Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573198/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917573198/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/292/2022/11/USPTO_building_767.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<b><i>Part One of a Two-Part Article</i></b><br/><br/>This two-part article discusses the various legal and evidentiary requirements for antedating and removing prior art that patent owners should consider when their pre-AIA patents are challenged based on a prior art publication or activity that is not otherwise subject to a statutory bar. It also addresses considerations for petitioners to consider when developing their initial and ongoing invalidity strategies. Part One leads off with a discussion of the evidentiary requirements for proving earlier invention, conception and diligence and actual reduction in practice. <Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917573201/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917573201/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/patent-strategy-tips-from-fed-circ-kroy-v-groupon-ruling-on-collateral-estoppel/</feedburner:origLink><title>Patent Strategy Tips from Fed. Circ. 'Kroy v. Groupon' Ruling on Collateral Estoppel</title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917570987/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~Patent-Strategy-Tips-from-Fed-Circ-Kroy-v-Groupon-Ruling-on-Collateral-Estoppel/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/patent-strategy-tips-from-fed-circ-kroy-v-groupon-ruling-on-collateral-estoppel/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:09:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently addressed the usage of the doctrine of collateral estoppel in patent infringement cases. Specifically, the court considered whether a finding of invalidity of claims by the PTAB at an <i>inter partes</i> review could be used to estop a patent holder from asserting patent infringement of different claims of the same patent in district court litigation.<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Cory G. Smith  and George C. Chen  and Ellen Komlos </thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/918762569/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Patent Litigation/Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/918762569/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/918762569/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/22/14/e47f9c074c0aac5ddada89889099/patented-767x633.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently addressed the usage of the doctrine of collateral estoppel in patent infringement cases. Specifically, the court considered whether a finding of invalidity of claims by the PTAB at an <i>inter partes</i> review could be used to estop a patent holder from asserting patent infringement of different claims of the same patent in district court litigation.<Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917570987/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917570987/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/post-amgen-patent-playbook-section-112-under-the-microscope/</feedburner:origLink><title>Post-Amgen Patent Playbook: Section 112 Under the Microscope</title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917570993/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~PostAmgen-Patent-Playbook-Section-Under-the-Microscope/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/post-amgen-patent-playbook-section-112-under-the-microscope/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:07:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[The Supreme Court’s unanimous 2023 decision in <i>Amgen v. Sanofi </i>reshaped enablement analysis for broad genus patent claims. In the wake of <i>Amgen</i>, broad functional claims have been scrutinized rigorously for sufficient disclosure. This article summarizes key post-<i>Amgen</i> decisions, which illustrate how patent drafters and litigators must navigate the fine line between claim breadth and disclosure depth in the post-<i>Amgen</i> era.<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Stephen R. Auten and Jaimin H. Shah and Roshan P. Shrestha, Ph.D.</thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917570990/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Patent Licensing and Transactions/Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917570990/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917570990/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/415/2024/02/01_Science_Chemical_Biology_Lab_Shutter_640x640.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[The Supreme Court’s unanimous 2023 decision in <i>Amgen v. Sanofi </i>reshaped enablement analysis for broad genus patent claims. In the wake of <i>Amgen</i>, broad functional claims have been scrutinized rigorously for sufficient disclosure. This article summarizes key post-<i>Amgen</i> decisions, which illustrate how patent drafters and litigators must navigate the fine line between claim breadth and disclosure depth in the post-<i>Amgen</i> era.<Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917570993/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917570993/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/chatgpts-ghibli-style-images-are-testing-copyright-law/</feedburner:origLink><title>ChatGPT’s Ghibli-Style Images Are Testing Copyright Law</title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917570999/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~ChatGPT%e2%80%99s-GhibliStyle-Images-Are-Testing-Copyright-Law/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/chatgpts-ghibli-style-images-are-testing-copyright-law/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:05:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Last month, a flood of whimsical, dreamlike portraits in the style of Studio Ghibli (the Japanese animation studio) swept across social media. What began as a playful social trend quickly raised legal concerns. Within days, users began reporting that OpenAI had restricted prompts referencing specific artistic styles. This trend offers a live case study of how generative AI may implicate core doctrines of copyright law, including derivative works, substantial similarity, and fair use.<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Saishruti Mutneja and Raghav Gurbaxani</thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917570996/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Copyrights/Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917570996/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917570996/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/1d/b3/ca55265448e2ab0b533049a2e936/mutneja-gurbaxani-ghibli-versions-1-767x633.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Last month, a flood of whimsical, dreamlike portraits in the style of Studio Ghibli (the Japanese animation studio) swept across social media. What began as a playful social trend quickly raised legal concerns. Within days, users began reporting that OpenAI had restricted prompts referencing specific artistic styles. This trend offers a live case study of how generative AI may implicate core doctrines of copyright law, including derivative works, substantial similarity, and fair use.</p><Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917570999/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917570999/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
<item type="ARTICLE">
<feedburner:origLink>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/ip-news/</feedburner:origLink><title>IP News</title><link>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/917571005/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist~IP-News/</link><guid>https://www.lawjournalnewsletters.com/2025/05/01/ip-news/</guid><pubDate>2025-04-30 23:03:00.000</pubDate><description><![CDATA[Federal Circuit Examines Written Description Requirements for U.S. Patent Application Publications Used as Prior Art Under Pre-AIA<br/>Federal Circuit Denies Preliminary Injunction In a Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act Case<br/><div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</description><author><thesource>Law Journal Newsletters</thesource><thename>Jeff Ginsberg and J. Jay Cho</thename><imageURL>https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917571002/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg</imageURL><thepracticearea>Intellectual Property</thepracticearea></author><media:content url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917571002/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg"><media:thumbnail url="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/-/917571002/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist.jpg" height="633" width="767"/></media:content>
<feedburner:origEnclosureLink>https://images.lawjournalnewsletters.com/contrib/content/uploads/sites/414/2023/06/MakingADifference.jpg</feedburner:origEnclosureLink>
<content:encoded><![CDATA[Federal Circuit Examines Written Description Requirements for U.S. Patent Application Publications Used as Prior Art Under Pre-AIA<br/>Federal Circuit Denies Preliminary Injunction In a Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act Case<br/><Img align="left" border="0" height="1" width="1" alt="" style="border:0;float:left;margin:0;padding:0;width:1px!important;height:1px!important;" hspace="0" src="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/~/i/917571005/0/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist">
<div style="clear:both;padding-top:0.2em;"><a title="Like on Facebook" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/28/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/fblike20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Pin it!" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/29/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist,"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/pinterest20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Post to X.com" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/24/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/x.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by email" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/19/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/email20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&#160;<a title="Subscribe by RSS" href="https://feeds.feedblitz.com/_/20/917571005/ljn/intellectual-property-strategist"><img height="20" src="https://assets.feedblitz.com/i/rss20.png" style="border:0;margin:0;padding:0;"></a>&nbsp;&#160;</div>]]>
</content:encoded></item>
</channel></rss>

