Patent Analysis in a
More Accessible Format
Divergent Audio Insights provides recorded versions of selected articles written by AddyHart attorneys. The series is designed for in-house counsel, inventors, executives, foreign associates, and patent professionals who want to follow significant developments in U.S. patent law in a convenient audio format.
Each episode addresses the same legal and strategic issues discussed in the corresponding written article. Listeners may follow the link accompanying each episode to review the full article, authorities, citations, and related materials.
Audio narrations are generated using artificial intelligence from published articles and reviewed for accuracy. If an audio narration and the written article differ, the written article controls. Please consult the written article for authorities, citations and hyperlinks.
Featured Audio Insight
Korean Software and AI Patents in the United States: Building a Section 101 Practical Application
A software or artificial-intelligence invention that appears patent eligible in Korea may still face substantial obstacles under Section 101 in the United States. Although both systems screen out claims directed merely to mental activity, mathematical logic, business rules, or information presentation, they apply different legal frameworks.
In this episode, Brandon R. Theiss compares Korea’s requirement for a technical idea utilizing laws of nature with the U.S. patent-eligibility analysis under Alice, Mayo, and Federal Circuit precedent. Korean eligibility may often be established when software-based information processing is concretely realized using hardware. In the United States, however, merely reciting a server, processor, database, AI model, or computer-readable medium may not be enough.
Featured Audio Insight
Claiming for Division: When Patent Prosecutors Should Invite Restriction
Patent prosecutors usually treat a restriction requirement as an inconvenience. In the right case, however, it can become a valuable portfolio-planning tool.
In this episode, Brandon R. Theiss explains why claims should sometimes be drafted to make multiple genuine inventions visible to the USPTO. For a platform technology, commercial value may reside in separate compounds, formulations, manufacturing methods, dosing regimens, biomarkers, devices, software components, or later-developed uses. A properly supported restriction requirement can provide a roadmap for pursuing those assets in separate divisional applications.
Featured Audio Insight
The Examiner Is Not Opposing Counsel: Patent Prosecution as Mediative Advocacy
Patent prosecutors are trained as advocates, but ordinary patent examination is not litigation in miniature. The examiner is not opposing counsel, the claims are not yet fixed, and the central task is often to develop claim language that is both patentable and commercially useful.
In this episode, Brandon R. Theiss explains why examiner-level prosecution is better understood as a form of mediative advocacy. Effective prosecution requires counsel to look beneath stated positions, identify the examiner’s actual concern, test assumptions against the claims, specification, prior art, and governing law, and develop supported alternatives that protect the client’s commercial objectives.
Get In Touch
Whether you are developing a new patent portfolio, transferring existing prosecution work, preparing for a product launch, or responding to a challenge against an issued patent, we would welcome the opportunity to discuss your objectives.
Please do not include confidential information in an initial inquiry. An attorney-client relationship is formed only through a written engagement agreement.