Advertise on podcast: IPWatchdog Unleashed

Send us a text In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn and Matt Johnson, Co-Chair of the PTAB Practice at Jones Day, take an in-depth look at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) nearly a decade and a half after its launch. Quinn and Johnson explain the viewpoint that the PTAB drifted from what many had initially expected, pointing to among other things the lengthy, merits focused institution decisions and serial challenges that eroded confidence among patent owners and raised serious questions about whether the PTAB functioned as a balanced error-correction mechanism.  The conversation zeroes in on structural flaws that distort outcomes rather than improve patent quality. Quinn and Johnson discuss obviousness determinations built on excessive combinations of prior art, warning that such analyses blur the line between legitimate hindsight reconstruction and genuine innovation assessment. They also highlight a systemic blind spot: nuisance “ankle-biter” assertions that exploit litigation economics while largely evading PTAB scrutiny. These cases have driven much of the political backlash against patents while remaining functionally untouched by the post-grant review process, leaving operating companies to absorb the cost as a tax on doing business and legitimate patent owners to be vilified as if they are the problem. Johnson offers concrete, targeted reform suggestions that would lead to a better functioning PTAB and more streamlined IPR review system. Instead of abstract complaints, he proposes narrowing PGR estoppel to encourage early challenges, moving IPR estoppel to the point of institution to eliminate gamesmanship, separating institution decisions from full merits adjudication to reduce confirmation bias, and rethinking quiet-title concepts to better align notice to implementers with settled expectations of patent owners.  The takeaway is clear: the PTAB does not need to be dismantled—but it does need disciplined recalibration if it is to deliver fairness, predictability, and legitimacy going forward. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn speaks with Megan Carpenter following her decision to step down as Dean of UNH Franklin Pierce School of Law after more than eight years. Carpenter reflects on rebuilding the institution’s IP-focused identity, restoring alumni trust, increasing enrollment and driving engagement growth, while explaining why builders—such as herself—eventually need new challenges. The conversation quickly broadens into a candid assessment of the IP ecosystem. Quinn and Carpenter discuss intellectual property as the legal infrastructure that enables and supports human creativity, innovation, and economic mobility—but acknowledge that intellectual property suffers from a serious messaging and credibility gap largely because the compelling argument for strong IP requires a story and explanation, while the misguided “weak IP is best” movement can fit its narrative onto a bumper sticker. Both Quinn and Carpenter also agree that weak enforcement, efficient infringement, and diminished remedies have distorted incentives, pushing innovators toward litigation instead of productive licensing and collaboration. They also tackle emerging issues, including AI’s impact on legal practice and education. Both emphasize that AI is a powerful tool, not a replacement for human judgment, and warn that law schools and firms that fail to train lawyers in AI literacy and prompting skills are already falling behind. The discussion concludes with a clear takeaway: IP professionals occupy a privileged and strategic position. Strengthening IP systems, rebuilding public trust, and expanding opportunity—especially for smaller innovators and underrepresented communities—are not optional. They are essential to sustaining innovation in a rapidly evolving global economy. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text In this edition of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn hosts a comprehensive discussion with Jim Carmichael, a former judge on the Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences, and Brad Close, Executive Vice President of Transpacific IP. The trio explores the current state of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), examining recent changes, the impact on patent owners and litigation, and the historical context of patent law and why the PTAB was created. They delve into the roles of non-practicing entities (NPEs), the integrity of the re-examination process, and the inefficiency of the patent litigation system. This detailed conversation sheds light on the complexities of patent enforcement, the economics of defending patents, and the broader legal landscape affecting innovators and patent practitioners. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn sits down with prolific inventor Gil Hyatt, exploring his innovative journey and aspirations to leave a lasting legacy. Gil, known for his significant contributions to the field of electrical engineering and microcomputers, shared insightful anecdotes about his early days, his pioneering work in artificial intelligence, and his ambitions to benefit future generations. Throughout the discussion, Gene and Gil tackled the controversies surrounding the perception of inventors like Hyatt as "patent trolls." Clarifying this mischaracterization, Hyatt explained that while his patents were widely licensed, he never instigated lawsuits for patent infringement—rather the lawsuits he was involved in often came from companies seeking invalidation for strategic advantage.  One of the key highlights of the conversation was Gil's creation of a non-profit AI Foundation, which is aimed at advancing AI technology and bolstering U.S. economic interests. This non-profit organization is set to hold Gil's substantial portfolio of AI patent applications, which cover his pioneering work dating back to the 1980s, and includes groundbreaking claims in artificial intelligence that could revolutionize sectors like education, manufacturing, and trade. Throughout the conversation Gil discusses the spirit of the American dream, and how the Foundation, operating in consultation with the Trump Administration, intends to leverage AI in support of trade negotiations, offering favorable licensing to U.S. companies while using patent rights to block foreign imports that violate the AI manufacturing process patents at the International Trade Commission. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed our host Gene Quinn, the founder of IPWatchdog is joined by the beautiful and talented Renee C. Quinn, his wife and business partner. Renee, a marketing and e-commerce expert, shares her journey into the world of intellectual property, her insights on doing business as a serial entrepreneur, and her stories from the past two decades as she and Gene built IPWatchdog into the media company it is today. We explore Renee's entry introduction to  intellectual property, personal stories and business lessons. We discuss how like many innovators, she did not initially recognize her own creativity as “IP.” That realization came only after exposure—after seeing how problem-solving, tinkering, and practical ingenuity translate into protectable assets. And, yes, she is a patented inventor, she runs and monetizes IPWatchdog, and she is increasingly working in front of the curtain moderating panels and webinars. So, please join us for this special edition of IPWatchdog Unleashed.  Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed we take a stroll down memory lane to look back on some of the conversations we had with guests during 2025 that were for one reason or another moments that stood out. This is not a "best o 2025" per se, and the pieces of conversations we pull together were not always chosen because they dealt with hard hitting substantive IP issues, although some do.  We begin our journey through 2025 with our conversation with Judge John Holcomb, who is a federal district court judge for the Central District of California. Judge Holcomb was one of our keynote speakers at IPWatchdog LIVE 2025, where he and Gene had a fireside chat style conversation, which was our podcast episode for March 10, 2025. In the piece of our conversation selected Gene asked him about how he became a judge and specifically about how he got onto the radar of those advising the President who to nominate. Judge Holcomb also discusses his judicial philosophy, retelling the tale of three umpires chatting after a game. We also remember an emotional conversation with Sherry Knowles, a breast cancer survivor who talked with us about the journey of life saving drugs from lab to market. We talk with Henry Hadad about music, creativity and who is the greatest guitarist of all time. We cover what it means to be innovative with Patrick Kilbride, how intellectual property empowers with WIPO Director General Daren Tang, the shocking reasons why Americans pay more for pharmaceuticals with Corey Salsberg, the petitioner's perspective about what changes are being made to the PTAB with Scott McKeown, and the never ending fight against fakes, dupes and counterfeits with Gina Johnson.  Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text 2025 was punctuated by a structural reset for the U.S. patent system. What unfolded was not incremental reform, but a coordinated shift driven by leadership change, policy realignment, economic pressure, and accelerating adoption of AI—all converging to reshape how patents are examined, challenged, monetized, and managed. This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we explore the biggest changes and trends that impacted the patent and innovation industry during 2025, with host Gene Quinn (IPWatchdog) and guest  Fran Cruz (Juristat). At the center of this reset was new leadership at the United States Patent and Trademark Office, which acted as the catalyst for most of the downstream change. With a renewed mandate to reduce backlog, improve patent quality, and modernize operations, the agency moved decisively—putting speed, accountability, and strategic coherence front and center.  One of the most consequential outcomes was the aggressive recalibration of post-grant proceedings at the Patent Trial and Appeal Board. The result has been a measurable shift away from IPRs. Patent owners gained leverage as challengers faced friction for the first time in years. At the same time, 2025 delivered the strongest pro-eligibility signals in over a decade. Through guidance updates, precedential decisions, examiner reminders, and MPEP revisions, the USPTO laid the groundwork for a more predictable and innovation-aligned approach to §101—particularly for software and AI-enabled inventions. While courts ultimately control the doctrine, the agency made clear it intends to examine inventions with an eye toward real-world utility. Economic realities also forced behavioral change. Significant USPTO fee increases—combined with corporate cost-cutting—pushed in-house teams to rethink portfolio strategy. The year saw sharper filing discipline, aggressive maintenance-fee pruning, fewer RCEs, and closer scrutiny of outside counsel spend. In-house teams became more data-driven, more prescriptive, and more strategic—reshaping firm-client dynamics in the process. Overlaying all of this was the rapid normalization of AI. The USPTO accelerated internal AI pilots to improve prior-art searching and examination efficiency, while practitioners increasingly adopted AI tools for drafting, searching, and analysis. What was experimental at the start of 2025 became table stakes by year-end. Firms and teams that failed to adapt are falling behind—and quickly. The year also surfaced tension points that will define the next phase: workforce and examiner culture shifts, changes to interview incentives, uncertainty around patent legislation, and renewed pressure on university patents and the Bayh-Dole Act framework. These unresolved issues signal that while the reset has begun, the system is still in motion. So, join us for a wide ranging conversation about the biggest moments of 2025 and what this likely means for the future.  Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we present a three-way conversation about patent eligibility between Gene Quinn, the founder of IPWatchdog.com, and patent attorneys and IPWatchdog Advisory Committee members John Rogitz and Clint Mehall.  Under Director John Squires, the Patent Office is attempting to restore discipline and structure to the Section 101 inquiry, with the office earlier this month having updated the Manual of Patent Examining Procedures (MPEP) in light of a recent decision by Squires in Ex parte Desjardins, where it was decided that improvements to the training of a machine learning technology were patent eligible. Thus, the Patent Office is emphasizing real-world technological improvements, requiring examiners to engage with the specification, and rejecting overbroad “abstract idea” characterizations—particularly for AI and machine-learning inventions.  At the same time the Patent Office is taking action, the Federal Circuit continues to inject uncertainty into the system. The CAFC refuses to define the term “abstract idea,” they continue to decide patent eligibility matters without claim construction, and panel-dependent outcomes are the norm. This is not doctrinal confusion—it is a judicial choice that enables early case dismissal while undermining the patent statute and harming innovators. Bottom line that comes from this conversation is that the USPTO is moving in the right direction, but without meaningful judicial or legislative correction of Section 101, these reforms can only go so far. A patent system that cannot protect modern technology cannot sustain long-term innovation. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text On this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn sits down with one of the leading PTAB practitioners and strategist Scott McKeown to unpack the USPTO’s controversial “one-and-done” PTAB rule package. With more than 10,000 comments filed and over 700 individual commenters weighing in, the proposal has become a flashpoint for questions that go way beyond discretionary denial and AIA trials. Gene and Scott drill down on what USPTO Director John Squires is actually trying to accomplish, why the Office is now wrapping aggressive policy changes in “fairness” rhetoric, why some view this proposed rules package to be an effort at de facto legislation, and why former Members of Congress who wrote the AIA are now publicly objecting to the rules package. They also flag the real-world impact on small and mid-size companies, the growing risk that the PREVAIL Act and PERA will now be dead on arrival, and what this latest PTAB fight tells us about a broken Congress, an overactive administrative state, and a patent system that simply can’t deliver quiet title. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text Join Gene Quinn and John White in this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed as they delve into the intricacies of passing the Patent Bar and its latest updates. With over two decades of friendship and collaboration in the patent industry, Gene and John share personal anecdotes, discuss the shifting phases of the patent exam, and scrutinize the impact of artificial intelligence on the exam and exam preparation. They then pivot for the second half of the conversation to more broadly discuss AI and how it is being used, and perhaps how it should be used, in patent practice. They also explore the importance of staying current with legal changes, the shortcomings of relying on AI for legal accuracy, and provide valuable insights for both veteran practitioners and newcomers to the field. Tune in for an enriching conversation that combines professional expertise, personal experiences and that singular brand of humor Gene and John bring to the topic.  Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed, we panel discussion that took place on October 27 as a part of our annual life sciences program. Initially styled as a conversation about how artificial intelligence is transforming life sciences, it becomes quickly apparent that the conversation was not going to be limited to the life sciences sector but instead was a robust discussion about what any innovative company should consider when considering the adoption of AI tools. Indeed, the discuss was really about what all companies must do to allow or even encourage the use of AI by researchers and scientists without opening catastrophic IP and data-security failures, risk and liability. We address data protection, trade secret risks, employee monitoring, AI governance, the importance of using AI responsibly, and much more. Moderated by Gene Quinn, founder of IPWatchdog, the conversation brought together Brian Cocca, Executive Director & Assistant General Counsel for IP at Regeneron; Gary Lobel, Chief IP Counsel; Drhuv Sud, Senior Director & Assistant General Counsel at Regeneron; and Giulia Toti, co-founder of Anchor AI. Collectively, the panel unpacked the real-world collision between AI adoption, IP protection, data governance, competitive strategy and risk. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text Every life-saving drug we know of—every cancer therapy, every vaccine, every breakthrough—started as an impossible idea. Turning that idea into reality takes more than science. It takes persistence, investment, and a patent system strong enough to protect innovation. In this episode of IPWatchdog Unleashed, Gene Quinn (IPWatchdog) sits down with Rob Sahr, a Shareholder at Wolf Greenfield, to unpack the extraordinary journey from molecule to medicine. Together, they explore how scientific breakthroughs depend not only on research and capital, but also on a stable and predictable patent system. From double patenting and government funding to judicial uncertainty and policy headwinds, the conversation dives into the fragile balance between innovation and access—and the miracles required to bring new drugs to life. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text In our latest IPWatchdog Unleashed podcast, we had a riveting and sometimes emotional conversation unfolded around one of the most pressing issues in life sciences today: the journey of life-saving drugs from laboratory to patient. We discuss the pivotal role a strong patent system plays in this important journey with guest Sherry Knowles. Sherry is the founder of Knowles Intellectual Property Strategies and former Chief Patent Counsel for GlaxoSmithKline. In addition to being one of the leading voices in the life sciences and patent industries, Sherry is also a cancer survivor. Among other things we discuss numerous patent system challenges facing innovator drug companies, the downward pressure generic drugs place on the industry and leading to important drugs becoming unavailable, the role of Pharmacy Benefit Mangers (PBMs) with respect to significantly raising the cost of drugs for Americans, and policy influences and legislation on Capitol Hill. Sherry also shares her personal story and insights into why patents are more than just legal constructs—they are deeply personal lifelines.  Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we have an interesting and entertaining conversation between Gene Quinn, President & CEO of IPWatchdog, Inc., and Henry Hadad, Chief IP Counsel and Deputy General Counsel at Bristol Myers Squibb. The conversation is wide ranging. They discuss the complexities and challenges patent laws are creating for medical diagnostics and cancer treatment. Henry shares his journey from law school to becoming a key player in the biopharmaceutical industry and elaborates on groundbreaking innovations in immuno-oncology that have transformed cancer treatment. The conversation delves into the impact of legislative and judicial changes on the IP landscape, the critical role of diagnostics in healthcare, and the importance of incentivizing innovation through a robust patent system. The episode concludes with reflections on the human impact of scientific advancements and the ongoing efforts required to find a cure for cancer. Henry’s final comment is one of optimism for innovators and the patent industry.  Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.

Send us a text This week on IPWatchdog Unleashed we will talk about trade disputes, regulatory overhauls, and sudden shifts in geopolitics and what all of that means for the business landscape and patent strategy.   The changing business climate is requiring companies of all sizes to reevaluate strategy, and those that best navigate the transition will future-proof their companies and innovation pipelines, wind up stronger in the long run, and have a more diversified and stable trajectory.  We will discuss building an IP strategy during turbulent times. To accomplish this we discuss tariffs and how many businesses are responding to tariffs, including efforts to move manufacturing to lower tariff countries, and what IP professionals need to have in mind as they find themselves with patent portfolios built for the business landscape and geography of the past, and with a strategy and portfolio that might not be optimal—or worse a strategy and portfolio that could be all wrong given how manufacturing centers, supply chains and global business realities are rapidly evolving. Recorded January 31, mentions Squires, Kiley, Holcomb and Holte Visit us online at IPWatchdog.com. You can also visit our channels at YouTube, LinkedIn, X, Instagram and Facebook.