European SMEs Can Access Up to €7,320 for IP Filings
On February 2, 2026, the European Commission, in cooperation with the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), launched the 2026 SME Fund. This grant initiative enables eligible small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) in the European Union and Ukraine to receive partial reimbursement of some official intellectual property fees.
China Officially Releases the Trademark Law (Draft for Revision) for Public Comment
On December 27, 2025, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress of China officially released the "Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China (Draft for Revision)" for public comment. This revision marks the fifth modification since the implementation of China's Trademark Law in 1983, and it deeply reconstructs the system in terms of bad-faith registration, procedural efficiency, and the exercise of rights. Although the draft revision deleted the previously controversial proposals such as the "mandatory five-year use statement" and the "mandatory transfer of bad-faith registrations," its core policy objectives of curbing bad-faith applications, strengthening use obligations, and improving procedural efficiency have not changed.
IP Tribunal of Supreme People's Court Awarded Punitive Damages of $295 Million Over the Past Seven Years
On January 28, 2026, the Supreme People's Court of China (SPC) held a press conference to summarize the results of intellectual property cases decided since the establishment of its Intellectual Property Tribunal on January 1, 2019. Notable data highlighted during the conference included the application of punitive damages, which reflects China's increased emphasis on strengthening intellectual property protection in recent years.
Third-Party Observations at the EPO: A Simple and Cost-Effective Tool, But Use It Wisely
Last month, the European Patent Office (EPO) issued a notice on the processing of third-party observations (TPOs) and the new online form for filing them. This is a good opportunity to review the key principles of TPOs and their potential effects, both positive and negative.
USPTO Issues New Guidance on AI-Assisted Inventorship, Rescinding Its 2024 Guidance
On November 28, 2025, USPTO Director John Squires issued new guidance on AI-assisted inventorship and explicitly rescinded the February 13, 2024, guidance that had been issued by his predecessor Director Vidal. At issue is what human activity rises to the level of inventorship when a human uses an AI tool in a manner that results in an invention.
Is Writing Your Own Dictionary Dangerous? Yes.
While a patent practitioner's work may not qualify for hazard pay, significant responsibilities include imagining how a patent may be interpreted in the future and avoiding potential negative consequences arising from the words the practitioner used to describe an invention. A powerful tool in a patent professional's drafting toolbox is the ability to assign a particular definition to any term used in a patent – to act as a "lexicographer." As a lexicographer, a patent drafter has the ability to simply restate the common meaning of a term for clarity or to assign an alternate – such as an expanded or narrowed – meaning to the term. The ability to act as a lexicographer is especially useful when the drafter wishes to use a term differently than the term's "ordinary and plain meaning," but can have unintended consequences when careful attention is not given to the specific use of terminology throughout a patent specification.
"Doing the Right Thing: Ethical Responsibilities in IP Practice"
All registered patent attorneys and patent agents (registered practitioners), as well as attorneys practicing in trademark and other non-patent law matters before the USPTO, are bound by the ethical standards set forth in USPTO Rules of Professional Conduct, 37 C.F.R. § 11.101. The key ethical rules include some fundamental basics such as: 1.) Do not lie, cheat, or steal. 2.) Do not take on work you do not feel that you are competent to perform. 3.) Avoid conflicts of interest in which a new client is opposed to a current or former client.
Insights Into the AIPLA 2025 Annual Meeting
This year, the American Intellectual Property Law Association (AIPLA) hosted its Annual Meeting in downtown Washington, D.C. Though each session of the Meeting was devoted to a different substantive topic, nearly every session had one thing in common: a discussion about how artificial intelligence (AI) is affecting that area of intellectual property (IP) practice. AI-related discussions included "hot topics" in AI, AI-assisted inventorship, what copyright-friendly jurisdictions are best suited for training artificial intelligence models using copyrighted material, how to prosecute AI-related inventions when rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 101, among a long list of other topics relating to AI.
CNIPA Releases Amendments to Patent Examination Guidelines Effective January 1, 2026
The China National Intellectual Property Administration (CNIPA) recently released amended Patent Examination Guidelines that will take effect on January 1, 2026. The amendments cover a wide range of topics, including new requirements for inventor identity, ethical standards for inventions involving artificial intelligence (AI), standards for disclosure and inventiveness of algorithm or data-related inventions, examination of inventions involving bitstreams, patent protection scope for plant varieties and biological breeding, and improvements to invalidation procedures.
USPTO Proposes Dramatic Restrictions for Inter Partes Review Institution
On October 17, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) published a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) that, if accepted, would dramatically change the criteria for Inter Partes Review (IPR) institution before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). The NPRM proposes several new rules that would restrict the institution of IPR's in many instances. Comments on the proposed rules must be submitted by November 17, 2025. Separately, but on the same day, the USPTO director, John A. Squires, announced that he would assume authority over making all IPR and Post-Grant Review (PGR) institution decisions, an authority that has been delegated to the PTAB since the inception of IPRs.
