Purepredictive, Inc. v. H2O.AI, Inc.

1 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. April 2020: The Increasing Importance of Trade Secret Protection for Artificial Intelligence

    Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan, LLPApril 27, 2020

    Given the limitations articulated in Alice and its progeny, it is unclear how many of the AI-related patents that have made their way through the U.S. Patent Office would survive in eventual litigation. See, e.g., Hyper Search, LLC v. Facebook, Inc., No. CV 17-1387-CFC-SRF, 2018 WL 6617143, at *10 (D. Del. Dec. 17, 2018) (invalidating patent with “neural network module”); see also Purepredictive, Inc. v. H20.AI, Inc., No. 17-CV-03049-WHO, 2017 WL 3721480, at *5 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 29, 2017),aff’d sub nom.Purepredictive, Inc. v. H2O.ai, Inc., 741 F. App’x 802 (Fed. Cir. 2018) (invalidating patent directed to automating predictive analytics). While each of these patents stands on its own and the decisions do not indicate that any future AI-related patents are necessarily invalid (or valid), they stand as guideposts that companies should be mindful of when considering patenting artificial intelligence inventions.