Blog - The Breuer Law Firm

Use Both Patents and Trade Secrets to Protect AI Innovations

Learn how combining patent protection with trade secret strategies can create a robust defense for your AI innovations.

The Patent Advantage for AI

Patents provide exclusive rights to your AI innovations for up to 20 years. For AI systems, this can include:

Novel neural network architectures
Unique training methodologies
Innovative applications of machine learning
Specialized hardware implementations

When Trade Secrets Make Sense

Trade secret protection is ideal for aspects of your AI that:

Are difficult to reverse engineer
Provide long-term competitive advantage
Would lose value if disclosed publicly
Involve proprietary data or training sets

Creating a Hybrid Protection Strategy

The most effective IP strategy for AI often combines both approaches. For example, you might patent the overall architecture of your AI system while keeping specific implementation details as trade secrets. Our attorneys can help you identify which components of your AI innovation are best suited for each type of protection and develop comprehensive safeguards that address your specific business needs.

Published on June 15, 2023

Why Litigation Experience Is Critical To Strategic Patent Portfolio Planning

Discover how attorneys with litigation experience can help you build stronger patents that hold up in court.

More Than Just a Piece of Paper: Building a Litigation-Ready Portfolio

This interactive guide explores why strategic patent portfolio planning isn't just about obtaining patents; it's about constructing a robust defense for your intellectual property. Many celebrate a granted patent, but its true strength is tested in litigation or high-stakes negotiations. We'll delve into how the foresight of a patent attorney with significant litigation experience is vital in forging patents that not only get approved by the USPTO but can actually withstand challenges and achieve your business objectives. This journey is about transforming patent drafting from a technical exercise into a strategic, forward-looking risk mitigation effort.

Discover how attorneys with litigation experience can help you build stronger patents that hold up in court and ultimately drive business success.

The Two Arenas: USPTO Approval vs. Courtroom Defensibility

Understanding the critical role of litigation experience in patent strategy begins with recognizing the distinct environments of patent prosecution before the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and patent enforcement or defense in federal court. Success in one does not automatically translate to success in the other, primarily because their objectives, standards, and processes differ significantly. This section illuminates these crucial differences, highlighting why a patent granted by the USPTO isn't inherently litigation-proof.

Aspect	USPTO Patent Prosecution	Federal Court Patent Litigation
Primary Goal	Obtain patent grant for an invention.	Enforce patent rights against infringers, defend against infringement allegations, and/or determine the validity of an issued patent.
Claim Interpretation Standard	Broadest Reasonable Interpretation (BRI) consistent with the specification.	Phillips standard: ordinary and customary meaning as understood by a person of ordinary skill in the art, in context of claims, specification, and file history. Claim construction by a judge post-Markman hearing.
Decision Maker	Patent Examiner.	Judge (for claim construction, matters of law); Jury (for findings of fact, infringement, damages, some aspects of validity).
Burden of Proof for Invalidity	Examiner must establish unpatentability by a preponderance of the evidence.	Challenger must prove invalidity by Clear and Convincing Evidence for an issued patent (which is presumed valid).
Key Focus	Meeting statutory requirements for patentability against known and cited prior art.	Surviving determined attacks on validity (often using newly discovered prior art or arguments) and proving infringement based on specific claim language.
Nature of Process	Largely ex-parte (between applicant and USPTO), interactive, and negotiative.	Inter-partes (between patent owner and accused infringer/challenger), adversarial.

The Litigator's Edge: Forging Patents That Withstand Fire

An attorney with substantial patent litigation experience brings an invaluable perspective to patent drafting. Having witnessed how patents are dissected and challenged in court, they build resilient assets designed to prevail under adversarial scrutiny. This section explores how that experience translates into stronger patents, focusing on claim construction, illustrating with a scenario, and detailing proactive defense against common invalidity arguments.

A. Claim Construction: The Heart of the Matter

In federal court, "claim construction" is a formal legal proceeding where a judge definitively determines the meaning and scope of disputed patent claim terms. This typically occurs in a Markman hearing. The judge's construction is based primarily on intrinsic evidence: the claims, the specification, and the prosecution history.

A litigator's foresight in drafting involves prioritizing clarity, precision, and proactively managing terminology to anticipate judicial scrutiny and minimize ambiguity that adversaries could exploit.

B. In-Depth Example: The "WidgetCo" Scenario

Consider WidgetCo, which patented a device with a claim element "a control module configured to dynamically adjust operational parameters." This was allowed by the USPTO. However, in an infringement suit against MegaCorp, the interpretation of "dynamically adjust" becomes central. Explore how a litigator-drafter's approach could have fortified WidgetCo's patent:

The Litigation Challenge:

MegaCorp argues its device (using pre-set, periodically updated tables) doesn't "dynamically adjust" in the real-time, sensor-driven way implied in WidgetCo's preferred embodiment. They also argue "dynamically adjust" is indefinite.

The Markman Hearing Battle:

WidgetCo argues for a broad interpretation. MegaCorp points to WidgetCo's prosecution history (emphasizing "real-time responsiveness") and lack of explicit definition for "dynamically adjust" covering table-based systems.

Potential Outcome: The court might adopt a narrow construction (non-infringement) or find the term indefinite (invalidity).

C. Proactive Defense: Drafting to Defeat Common Invalidity Arguments

A patent litigator's defensive mindset is invaluable during drafting. They anticipate how opponents will attack a patent's validity and build in safeguards. Click on each common invalidity ground below to see the typical challenge and how a litigator-drafter proactively addresses it:

The Strategic Payoff: Why Litigation-Proof Patents Matter to Your Bottom Line

Investing in patents drafted with a litigator's foresight is a strategic business decision with substantial returns. Litigation-resilient patents are more valuable assets, impacting your ability to attract investment, maximize licensing revenue, and navigate the market with confidence. This section explores these tangible benefits and underscores the sobering reality of patent invalidity rates.

💰 Attracting Venture Capital

VCs scrutinize IP quality and defensibility. Litigation-ready patents signal:

🛡️ Reduced Risk: Less likelihood of costly invalidation or future litigation.
🚧 Effective Barriers to Entry: Stronger "moat" around technology.
📈 Higher Valuation & Exit Opportunities: More attractive for investment and acquisition.

🤝 Maximizing Licensing Revenue

Stronger, defensible patents command better licensing terms because of:

💎 Higher Perceived Value: Justifies significant upfront payments and royalties.
📉 Reduced Challenge Risk: More stable and predictable royalty streams.
⚖️ Greater Negotiation Leverage: Makes licensing a more attractive option for potential licensees.

The Sobering Reality: Patent Invalidity Rates

A significant number of granted patents don't survive post-grant challenges. Statistics from PTAB and federal courts show high invalidation rates. Investing in litigation-informed drafting significantly improves your odds.

Data illustrates general trends in patent challenges.

Conclusion: Invest in Foresight, Secure Your Innovation's Future

The true strategic value of a patent lies not merely in its issuance, but in its ability to withstand the pressures of litigation, investor scrutiny, and competition. Patent attorneys with deep litigation experience bring a "battle-tested" wisdom, crafting patents as durable, powerful business assets. This section emphasizes that choosing patent counsel is a critical strategic decision and that a litigation-informed patent strategy is a continuous process of evaluation and adaptation.

Ultimately, the goal is to build a strategically sound, litigation-resilient patent portfolio. This investment in foresight is an investment in the long-term security and commercial potential of your innovations.

The Importance of Hiring a Patent Attorney With a Background in AI

Why technical expertise matters when protecting AI innovations and how it leads to stronger patent applications.

The Technical Advantage

Patent attorneys with hands-on AI development experience offer several critical advantages:

They can communicate effectively with your technical team, understanding complex concepts without extensive explanations
They recognize which aspects of your AI system are truly novel and patent-worthy
They can anticipate future developments in the field and draft claims that remain relevant
They understand the practical challenges of implementing AI solutions

Navigating Patent Office Challenges

The USPTO has historically been skeptical of software patents, and AI inventions face additional scrutiny. A technically-trained attorney can:

Frame AI inventions in ways that satisfy patent eligibility requirements
Provide detailed technical explanations that overcome examiner objections
Identify the most patentable aspects of complex AI systems
Draft claims that are broad enough to be valuable but specific enough to be allowed

Beyond Patents: Comprehensive AI Protection

Technical expertise also informs other aspects of AI protection, including trade secret strategies, copyright considerations for training data and models, and open source licensing issues. Our team combines legal expertise with technical backgrounds in computer science and AI development to provide comprehensive protection for your innovations.

Published on April 10, 2025

Let's protect your innovations together.

Submitting this form or sending an email does not create any attorney-client relationship. Please do not send us any confidential information. Before forming any attorney-client engagement, The Breuer Law Firm will check for possible conflicts of interest and must consider whether to accept the potential engagement.

Name *

Phone Number

Message

I acknowledge the terms in the disclaimer. *

Insights & Blog Articles