Stay Up to Date on the Latest Firm and Industry News from SLW

If you have been hearing the phrase “quantum computing” more and more lately and wondering what it actually means for your patent practice, you are not alone. Quantum computing is a subset of quantum technology, which is one of the most rapidly developing fields in science and engineering today. Quantum technology spans sensing, communication, and computing technologies, with quantum computing being the fastest growing quantum technology.

On February 6, 2026, the Federal Circuit affirmed summary judgment of invalidity under 35 U.S.C. § 101 for all asserted claims across six patents in Innovaport LLC v. Target Corp., No. 24-1545 (Fed. Cir. Feb. 6, 2026) (nonprecedential). The patents claimed systems and methods for providing product location information within a retail store: receiving a customer’s query, searching a database containing product locations and related information, and returning results that included cross-referenced product suggestions. The court found the claims directed to the abstract idea of “collecting, analyzing, retrieving, and displaying information” at Alice step one, then concluded at step two that the additional elements added no “inventive concept.” 

A practical way to refill it: inventions.md and fast (detailed!) provisional filings. 

In brief: 

Agentic coding collapses the time and capital advantages that used to protect early-stage software companies. When competitors can reach feature parity in days, “shipping faster” stops being a moat and becomes table stakes. 

One of the few levers you can pull early is intellectual property, but only if you capture inventions while you build. 

The simplest workflow I’ve found: instruct your coding agent to surface patentable technical ideas and log them in an inventions.md file, then file provisional patent applications quickly on the ideas that survive a rough patentability screen.

As a kid growing up in the 1980s, I was captivated by the emerging world of home computers. I had a TI-99/4A first and later upgraded to a Commodore 64.  I spent countless hours as a child writing programs in BASIC, trying to make these first home computers do various things, and absorbed in the possibilities they represented.  In reflecting on the evolution of computers over the decades since those childhood experiences, I’ve come to the realization that one of the major exponential advances in computer technology for users was when home computers became widely available.  That was the biggest change in our lives that came from computers and, in my view, far more transformative than any of the incremental improvements that followed.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has introduced a new Streamlined Claim Set Pilot Program designed to expedite examination of qualifying utility patent applications. The program aims to reduce pendency and improve examination efficiency by focusing examiner resources on concise, clearly structured claim sets.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has announced the Automated Search Pilot Program (ASAP!), launching October 20, 2025. This initiative marks a significant step in the agency’s adoption of AI tools to improve patent examination efficiency and transparency.

The USPTO’s decision in Ex parte Desjardins is good news for applicants in the AI and software spaces. The Appeals Review Panel (ARP), including newly appointed Director John Squires, overturned a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) decision that had raised a new § 101 eligibility rejection.  

The PTAB had treated the claims as directed to a mathematical algorithm without integration into a practical application, but the ARP found they reflected concrete improvements in how an AI model functions. This matters beyond one case: the ARP emphasized that eligibility should not be denied merely because claims involve mathematical concepts, algorithms, or machine learning.

TL;DR Because cited non-patent literature (NPL) may be increasingly AI-generated, patent practitioners should examine NPL more closely and develop enablement-based strategies for challenging questionable references. Overview A recent Harvard Kennedy School study¹ on AI-generated scientific papers infiltrating Google Scholar raises important considerations for patent attorneys and IP counsel regarding prior art rejections under § 102 […]

On August 4, 2025, the USPTO issued a subject matter eligibility memorandum aimed at examiners in key technology centers handling AI and software inventions. The memo makes clear that it is not intended to announce new policy or procedure but rather to reinforce longtime guidance under 35  U.S.C. § 101.