From MedTech devices and AI-enabled hardware to cloud platforms and AI drug discovery, AI technologies are increasingly central to inventorship and innovation across sectors. As AI becomes embedded in regulated medical technologies such as Software as a Medical Device (SaMD) and AI-enabled diagnostics, new evidentiary and regulatory considerations are emerging in patent disputes. This session reviews recent AI-related patent cases and examines how courts are shaping litigation and portfolio strategy going forward.

• How are parameters around patent eligibility evolving in AI cases.
• How litigation strategy and outcomes vary across a range of tech sectors including AI-enabled hardware, software, multifunction innovation products and MedTech.
• Address new evidentiary and regulatory considerations for handling AI in regulated technologies such as SaMD.
• How are infringement theories are being used in AI patent litigation.
• A review of recent cases like Nueral AI, LLC v. NVIDIA Corp., and Solos Technology’s complaint against Meta and EssilorLuxottica.

The rise of the 505(b)(2) pathway is changing how branded pharmaceutical and biotech companies approach lifecycle management and litigation. Unlike ANDA generics, 505(b)(2) applicants can enter earlier with differentiated products while relying on branded data, creating a hybrid competitive threat that often falls outside traditional Orange Book assumptions. Join this workshop to hear a discussion around defence strategies from a panel of experts from the generic and innovator industries.

• How in-house teams can identify and defend against 505(b)(2) challenges.
• Distinguish ANDA generics from 505(b)(2) applicants and the implications for defence strategy.
• Identify early warning signs through development activity, regulatory engagement, and competitor monitoring.
• Analyse how formulation, dosing, and delivery changes are used to avoid listed patents.

Under Director Squires’ leadership, the PTAB has seen reduced reliance on discretionary denials and a recalibrated role for inter partes review. This session brings together former PTAB faculty and experienced PTAB litigators to examine how institution standards are being applied in practice, why certain challenges are proving less viable than before, and when alternatives such as ex parte re-examination may offer a more effective path.

• Why challengers are re-assessing IPR risk and turning to ex parte re-examination, including trade-offs around timing, estoppel, and examiner workload.
• How patent owners are using PTAB uncertainty to influence parallel litigation and settlement leverage.
• Practical guidance on selecting and sequencing invalidity tools in the current PTAB environment
• Consider venues in alternative jurisdictions such as the EPO and UPC.

This judges’ panel offers candid insight into how courts approach patent disputes involving complex technologies, including software, electronics, and standards-based products. Drawing on recent decisions and, judges from key US jurisdictions will discuss what most influences outcomes from claim construction and technical tutorials to expert testimony and damages models.

Hatch-Waxman case outcomes are often decided by early choices that shape risk, cost, and leverage long before trial. This session offers a structured review of how companies are building and defending Hatch-Waxman cases, from the first Paragraph IV notice through to final judgement.

• Identify strategic decision points from Paragraph IV notice to trial, and where early decisions most influence outcomes.
• Review recent key Hatch-Waxman cases and examine how their outcomes have influenced litigation strategy.
• Managing evidence, discovery scope, and expert strategy.
• Compare US Hatch-Waxman litigation strategy to parallel approaches in Canada and other key jurisdictions, including differences in timing, remedies and leverage.

First enacted in 1979, and the basis of all modern US Trade Secret legal regulations, including the establishment of the DTSA, in August 2026 the Uniform Law Commission’s Drafting Committee’s will meet to discuss potential updates to the Uniform Trade Secrets Act (UTSA). Originally drafted to resolve inconsistencies in the treatment of trade secrets across state lines, there has since been debate as to whether the act still meets its original intentions. Proposed reforms aim to address this through key aspects of the statute, including reasonable measures, extraterritorial reach, damages, and the interaction between the UTSA and DTSA. This session will review recent changes to the UTSA, discuss ensuing strategy, and consider the effect on the DTSA, and how it may be adapted in response.

• How UTSA jurisprudence has evolved since its last amendment in 1985, including divergent state court approaches to reasonable measures, trade secret identification, and the "reasonable under the circumstances" standard.
• Concerns around inconsistencies in state-by-state adoption of the UTSA and whether it still achieves the uniformity it was designed to deliver.
• How courts are addressing the UTSA's limited extraterritorial reach, and the growing trend toward hybrid state-federal (UTSA-DTSA) filings to extend jurisdictional coverage.
• Review the Uniform Law Commission's Drafting Committee's proposed updates to the UTSA and consider how any resulting changes may require corresponding adaptation of the DTSA.