Recent legal and practice developments
Substantive commentary based on official rules, agency publications and reported decisions. Each article identifies its jurisdiction, review date and primary sources.
UNITED STATES · CASE LAW
Recentive v Fox. AI patent eligibility lessons
The Federal Circuit explains why applying familiar machine learning to a new data environment was insufficient on the claims before it.
Read the analysis →EUROPE · CASE LAW
EPO G 1/24 and claim interpretation
What it means that the description and drawings are always consulted when claims are interpreted for patentability.
Read the analysis →INDIA · PATENTS
India patent rules and filing practice in 2026
A practical compliance review based on the Patents Act, current rules, forms and official fee information.
Read the guide →INDIA · TRADE MARKS
India trade mark eKYC developments
What applicants and agents should verify in light of the Trade Marks Registry notices issued in 2026.
Read the update →UNITED STATES · AI
US AI patent inventorship guidance
How claim focused contribution records help teams assess inventorship when artificial intelligence tools are used.
Read the guide →UNITED STATES · ELIGIBILITY
USPTO eligibility declarations
A careful guide to the agency procedure and the limits of evidence submitted during Section 101 examination.
Read the guide →EUROPEAN UNION · TRADE MARKS
EU trade mark and design practice in 2026
A portfolio review covering specifications, ownership, evidence of use and the staged design law reform.
Read the guide →Patent resources
Before filing a patent application
Preserve confidentiality, record the inventors and technical contribution, collect drawings and alternatives, identify planned disclosures and clarify commercial markets before selecting the filing route.
Review drafting support →Provisional or complete specification?
The appropriate choice depends on the maturity of the invention, available technical detail, disclosure timetable and filing strategy. A provisional filing is not a substitute for an adequately developed disclosure.
Understand patent services →Responding to an FER or office action
Begin with the claim language, cited references, examiner’s mapping and available amendment support. Consider both legal argument and the technical operation of the invention.
View prosecution support →Understanding a patentability search
A patentability search identifies relevant prior disclosures and informs drafting strategy. It does not guarantee that an application will be granted or remain valid.
Compare search types →International filing resources
PCT filing strategy
The PCT route can defer certain national filing decisions while providing an international search and written opinion. National or regional phase filings remain necessary for enforceable rights.
Explore PCT support →US and EP drafting differences
A sound international application should anticipate jurisdiction specific issues involving amendment basis, claim form, eligibility, clarity and support without fragmenting the core disclosure.
View cross border support →Trademark resources
Search before adopting a brand
A search before filing can identify legal and commercial conflicts before investment in packaging, promotion, domains and registration.
Trademark search support →Objection versus opposition
An examination objection is raised by the Registry during prosecution. An opposition is generally brought by a third party after publication. The required evidence and procedure differ.
Trademark prosecution →Editorial approach
Resources published by PRASA IP explain practical IP processes using primary legal and official sources. Each current article identifies a responsible reviewer, the relevant jurisdiction and the date of substantive review.