Updates on IP news from our global team!

Understanding Fair Use in the Age of Generative AI: The U.S. Copyright Office’s Perspective

The rise of generative artificial intelligence (AI) has sparked a pivotal legal debate that now stands on the edge of a major turning point. At the heart of the issue is a fundamental question: can the use of copyrighted works to train generative AI models be considered fair use, or does it constitute infringement? For years, developers have trained these models on vast datasets that include copyrighted materials, largely under the assumption that such use falls within fair use doctrine. Moreover, many have argued that impeding free access to these materials would be catastrophic to technological progress and place the U.S. at a disadvantage on the global stage. Copyright holders and creators, on the other hand, have voiced their concern that their own works are being used without their permission to produce content with which they must compete, placing their livelihoods at risk.

Sigray – Implicit Claim Construction and Anticipation by Inherency

In Sigray, Inc. v. Carl Zeiss X-Ray Microscopy, Inc., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit held that the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) engaged in implicit and erroneous claim construction, and concluded that the claimed magnification range of an X-ray imaging system of a patent owned by Zeiss is inherently disclosed in an anticipatory prior art reference. The Sigray decision is an important reminder of two principles: (1) that an inherent disclosure can anticipate claims even if the inherent feature is unrecognized, unintentional, or undesirable, and (2) that the claim language governs the scope and meaning of the claim.

日本語 ▪ 简体中文 ▪ 繁體中文 ▪ عربي

Inventors’ Intended Claim Scope is Irrelevant in Determination of Broadening in Reissue Applications

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit recently affirmed a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board sustaining the examiner’s rejection of a claim of a reissue application under 35 U.S.C. § 251 because the reissue claim broadened the scope of the original patent. The court held that when considering whether a claim presented in a reissue application broadens the scope of the original patent under 35 U.S.C. § 251(d), one must look to the “actual scope of the claim-at-issue, not the subjective intended scope of the inventors.”

日本語 ▪ 简体中文 ▪ 繁體中文 ▪ عربي

Federal Circuit Elaborates on Claiming Priority of a Design Patent Application to an Earlier-Filed Utility Patent Application

On April 22, 2025, the Federal Circuit ruled in In re Bonnie Iris McDonald Floyd that a design patent application could not claim priority to an earlier-filed utility patent application for lack of sufficient written description, affirming a decision of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board.

日本語 ▪ 简体中文 ▪ 繁體中文 ▪ عربي

Singapore Announces Upcoming Official Fee Revisions



The Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has announced revisions to its official fee schedule, particularly affecting excess claim fees for patent applications. The revised fee schedule applies only to applications filed on or after September 1, 2025.

UAE and USA Strengthen IP Cooperation with Accelerated Patent Grant Agreement

On July 11, 2025, in Geneva, Switzerland, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) signed an Accelerated Patent Grant (APG) Agreement.



USPTO Moves PTAB Hearings to In-Person Format Starting September 1, 2025



The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced that, effective September 1, 2025, all Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) hearings will be held in person, with remote appearances permitted only for good cause.



Our Dubai office has moved. We are now located at The Office 1, Level 2, One Central. Dubai World Trade Centre, Dubai, United Arab Emirates.

www.obwb.com