With the evolution of AI and automation technologies, patent drafting software has emerged as a tool that may be used by patent agents and attorneys. However, there are several things to consider when choosing and evaluating patent drafting software, such as accuracy, natural language processing, customization, integration, collaboration, and compliance with patent laws, which are vital for producing legally robust patent applications.

The emergence of artificial intelligence opened the door for countless new applications and tools, including AI tools for patent drafting, automated patent drafting, and AI patent drafting assistants. For example, AI may be used to assist with various tasks throughout the patent drafting process, including invention disclosure form creation, analysis, and enhancement; patentability reviews and assessments; and drafting applications.

Solve Intelligence introduces an AI-enhanced document editor that streamlines patent drafting by filling in invention disclosure gaps and preempting competitor workarounds, ensuring comprehensive and robust patent applications.

Solve Intelligence's AI software now automatically configures itself from provided patent examples to adopt their unique drafting style, enhancing personalization and streamlining the patent drafting process for attorneys.

Solve Intelligence leverages advanced AI to enhance patent proofreading and analysis, offering detailed comments for higher quality, enforceable patents.

Solve Intelligence's AI-enhanced document editor streamlines patent drafting by automating the integration of technical drawings and reference labels into the specification, offering a precise and efficient approach to patent drafting.

Boosting patent drafting efficiency by 40-60%, Scale LLP uses Patent Copilot™ to enhance quality, streamline workflows, and more.

Earlier this year, the EPO introduced new guidelines for examination relating to inventions concerning artificial intelligence (See G-II-3.3.1). The last paragraph of these guidelines suggest that applications to AI-related inventions may require specific disclosure surrounding any algorithms used by an AI invention, as well as any training data used to train the AI, where such training data is required to achieve the technical effect of the invention. 

‍

A change in the Guidelines usually reflects a change in thinking or application of the law by the EPO. Indeed, it’s always interesting to see how such changes are actually implemented in practice.  

‍

The recently issued decision T1669/21 of the EPO Board of Appeal provides useful insight into exactly what sorts of specific disclosure may be required to satisfy the sufficiency requirements for patent applications relating to AI inventions. 

‍

A recent T-decision of the Boards of Appeal (T 1741/22) has provided an interesting deviation in how the EPO assesses the requirement of inventive step, from both a previous decision (T 2681/16) and the EPO Guidelines for Examination.

‍

Artificial intelligence (AI) is already having a substantial impact in the practice of Intellectual Property (IP) Law, with platforms such as Solve Intelligence's Patent Copilot assisting attorneys in drafting and prosecuting patent applications. These AI platforms can help patent attorneys realise efficiency gains and help to provide high-quality patents. 

‍

Until earlier this year, the use of AI was largely unregulated across the world. Now, the picture has somewhat changed, with different countries implementing different strategies when it comes to regulating AI, to promote safety but also to remain competitive. Earlier this year, the Artificial Intelligence Act entered into force in the EU, becoming the world's first comprehensive regulation for AI. In this article we have a look at the obligations that the EU AI Act puts on AI technology providers, such as providers of AI patent drafting and prosecution tools.

‍

In recent years, there has been a substantial increase in the filing of patent applications relating to AI-inventions at the EPO. In response to this, the EPO has started and continues to develop a framework for assessing the eligibility and patentability of AI inventions, with the introduction of new guidelines and evolving case law. This article outlines key considerations, common pitfalls, and best practices for drafting patent applications directed to AI inventions at the EPO.

The rapid rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI) is reshaping numerous industries, including the legal profession. For U.S. lawyers, AI tools offer tremendous potential to improve efficiency, accuracy, and speed in completing routine and complex tasks alike. However, alongside the benefits of these powerful tools come ethical considerations. This article explores these ethical challenges in detail, particularly in light of the American Bar Association’s (ABA) recent Formal Opinion 512, which provides guidance for the ethical use of generative AI in legal practice.

As global innovation accelerates, the United Kingdom finds itself at a critical juncture. Despite ranking among the top nations in the world for innovation, UK businesses, particularly SMEs, are falling behind in securing international patent protection. A recent report from The Chartered Institute of Patent Attorneys (CIPA) reveals a concerning trend: while global patent filings hit record numbers, British companies are struggling to keep pace, risking their competitive edge in key international markets. In an increasingly interconnected world, securing international patents is not just a strategic advantage - it's a necessity for financial growth, enabling companies to maximise the commercial potential of their innovations on a global scale.