1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |C3P-No! USPTO Says No AI Inventors

C3P-No! USPTO Says No AI Inventors

Client Alert | 1 min read | 05.04.20

Last Monday, the PTO affirmed its earlier (and unsurprising) position that a patent application filed in July was incomplete because it named an artificial intelligence as the inventor.  The application is believed to be among the first to name an AI as an inventor.

In reaffirming its position of AI non-inventorship, the PTO noted that the Title 35 consistently suggests personhood and refers to inventors as natural persons.  As one example, said the PTO, the statutes involving the inventor oath or declaration refer to the executor as a “person.”  Interpreting “inventor” to broadly encompass non-persons, argued the PTO, would contradict the plain reading of the statutes.

The USPTO also relied on Federal Circuit decisions that exclude states and corporations from holding inventorship.  These decisions, the PTO noted, explain that the entire concept of “conception” – the touchstone of inventorship – requires a human mind to do the conceiving.

The attempt to name an AI as the inventor illustrates how advances in AI technology continue to challenge our traditional thinking about personhood – and how the law will have to cope with the evolving concept.  Read the full decision here.

Insights

Client Alert | 5 min read | 04.21.25

DOJ Secures First Criminal Wage-Fixing Conviction in Home Health Care Staffing Case

In a landmark verdict on April 14, 2025, the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division notched its first-ever jury trial conviction for criminal wage-fixing under the Sherman Act in United States v. Eduardo Lopez in the District of Nevada. A home health care staffing executive, Eduardo (“Eddie”) Lopez, was found guilty of (1) conspiring with several competing home healthcare staffing agencies to fix the wages of home health nurses in the Las Vegas area, and (2) defrauding the unwitting buyer of his agency by concealing the then-ongoing antitrust investigation into nurse wage and hiring practices. It is worth noting, however, that while the Lopez conviction is a significant milestone for the DOJ’s campaign into labor antitrust violations, wage-fixing cases may be more straightforward to prosecute than no-poach agreements, where the DOJ still has not prevailed before a jury. This victory nonetheless affirms the DOJ’s ability to criminally prosecute labor market collusion as a criminal offense after numerous failed attempts, signaling the prudence of further caution for companies and individuals to mitigate risk in labor antitrust markets....