< Back to Blog Page

A Tale of Two Jurisdictions: Sufficiency of Disclosure for Artificial Intelligence (AI) Patents in the U.S. and the EPO

A Tale of Two Jurisdictions: Sufficiency of Disclosure for Artificial Intelligence (AI) Patents in the U.S. and the EPO

In order to prepare applications for filing in multiple jurisdictions, practitioners should be cognizant of claiming styles in the various jurisdictions that they expect to file AI-related patent applications in, and draft claims accordingly. For example, different jurisdictions, such as the U.S. and EPO, have different legal tests that can result in different styles for claiming artificial intelligence(AI)-related inventions.

In this article, we will compare two applications, one in the U.S. and the other in the EPO, that have the same or similar claims. Both applications claim priority to the same PCT Application (PCT/AT2006/000457) (the “’427 PCT Application”), which is published as PCT Pub. No. WO/2007/053868.

As we shall see, despite the application having the same or similar claims, prosecution of the applications in the two jurisdictions nonetheless resulted in different outcomes, with the U.S. application prosecuted to allowance and the EPO application ending in rejection.

Read the full article at the link below.

Sign Up for the Newsletter

Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.

©Copyright ML4Patents | Powered By Patinformatics