Navigating Patent Law for Video Games and AI: Insights from a Seasoned Patent Attorney
In the complex world of patent law, understanding the nuances and intricacies of software patents, particularly in the realm of video games and artificial intelligence (AI), is crucial. John Rogitz, the managing patent attorney at Rogitz & Associates, brings over 15 years of experience in this field, specializing in software patents for some of the largest video game companies globally. His expertise extends beyond video games to encompass virtual and augmented reality technologies, as well as Artificial Intelligence and Machine Learning.
Representing a diverse range of clients, from established industry giants to innovative startups, Rogitz navigates the ever-evolving landscape of patent law with finesse. As a thought leader in the field, he actively contributes to the legal community by serving on the Executive Committee of the IP Section of the California Lawyers Association, teaching as an adjunct professor at Trinity Law School, and providing insightful commentary on platforms like IPWatchdog.com.
In a recent podcast recording, Rogitz delved into the intricacies of software patents, shedding light on prosecution strategy and the evolving guidelines set forth by the Patent Office. One of the key topics of discussion was the 2019 Patent Eligibility Guidance (PEG), which aimed to streamline the patent application process for software-related inventions. While the PEG was lauded for simplifying the path to obtaining patents, Rogitz pointed out its limitations in addressing potential litigation issues, as the Federal Circuit has yet to fully embrace the USPTO’s stance.
Expressing his reservations about the reliance on federal agencies to interpret case law and shape patent guidelines, Rogitz highlighted the need for a more transparent and consistent approach to patent eligibility. Despite the positive impact of the PEG, he emphasized the importance of upholding the principles of the American legal system in patent law interpretation.
Another focal point of the discussion revolved around obviousness, particularly in the context of KSR (KSR International Co. v. Teleflex Inc.), a landmark Supreme Court decision that reshaped the standard for evaluating patent claims. Rogitz emphasized the significance of providing evidence to demonstrate a lack of teaching, suggestion, and motivation in patent applications, underscoring the continued relevance of the TSM (Teaching, Suggestion, Motivation) test in determining nonobviousness.
Drawing from his extensive experience in working with patent examiners, Rogitz highlighted the challenges faced by practitioners in persuading examiners to accept nonobvious claims. While the KSR factors play a crucial role in assessing obviousness, the requirement for evidence to support motivation to combine elements remains a key determinant in patent prosecution.
Despite the evolving landscape of patent law and the shifting guidelines from the Patent Office, Rogitz remains steadfast in his commitment to advocating for his clients and ensuring their innovations are protected under the law. By balancing technical expertise with legal acumen, he continues to navigate the complexities of software patents, paving the way for groundbreaking advancements in video games, AI, and beyond.
For a more in-depth exploration of the conversation with John Rogitz, tune in to the podcast available on IPWatchdog Unleashed on Buzzsprout or your preferred podcast platform. Stay informed, stay engaged, and stay ahead in the dynamic world of patent law.
