Please provide your contact information
so we can contact you later
Name
Phone / WeChat / Email
Remarks
Please provide your contact information
so we can contact you later
Name
Phone / WeChat / Email
Remarks
New USPTO Rules: A Comprehensive Analysis of Patent Ownership for AI-Assisted Inventions (Including a Guide for Cross-Border E-Commerce Businesses)
2025-12-10
“I used AI to design a futuristic-looking Bluetooth earbud housing. Can it be patented?”
The applications of artificial intelligence (AI) in cross-border e-commerce span intelligent customer service, multilingual translation, market forecasting, content generation, and even product research and development—essentially covering the entire value chain. AI has become a core tool for enterprise innovation, but how should intellectual property rights be delineated for inventions and creations to which AI has contributed?
On December 1, 2025, the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) issued the latest examination guidelines (“New Guidelines”), which provided a clear answer to the issue of defining inventors in patent applications involving artificial intelligence (AI).
01
Overturn and rebuild the rules
Overhaul of the Rules: A New Framework
The new guidance entirely abandons the approach, set forth in the “Guidance on Inventorship in AI-Assisted Inventions” issued on February 13, 2024, of using the “Pannu factor” to analyze human–AI collaboration.
The “Pannu factors” were originally used to determine whether multiple natural persons qualified as joint inventors.
The USPTO has now explicitly stated
Where only one natural person uses AI in the invention process, the issue of “joint invention” does not arise at all, because an AI system is not a “person” in the legal sense.
This means that for the most common scenario of 'a single human inventor + AI tool', the review will revert to the most fundamental and traditional 'conception' standard, and the process will be simplified.
02
The enduring core: human “ideation” remains the sole cornerstone.
The Unchanged Core: Human “Conception” as the Sole Cornerstone
Although the rules have been adjusted to accommodate new technologies, the foundational principles of the U.S. patent system remain unchanged.
First, the inventor must be a natural person, and this iron rule has not changed.
An artificial intelligence system is not a “person” and cannot serve as a joint inventor. Accordingly, regardless of its complexity, AI cannot be designated as an inventor or joint inventor. Applicants should treat AI’s participation in the same way as they would any other tool.
Secondly, 'conception' is the only test of inventorship, and this standard has not changed.
Conception refers to a clear, complete, and workable concept concerning an invention that is formed in the inventor’s mind. It requires a specific and definite idea and a particular solution to the problem at hand; merely establishing an overall objective or research plan is insufficient.
The key lies in, the inventor must have a clear understanding of all the details of the invention to be protected in their mind, with a level of specificity that would allow a person of ordinary skill to put it into practice without extensive additional research or experimentation.
03
How to respond in real cross-border combat?
Actionable Strategies for Cross-Border Practice
For cross-border e-commerce companies seeking international expansion through innovation, the new guidelines provide a clear roadmap for action.
1
Ironclad evidence: a systematic record of the entire process of 'human conception'.
It is necessary to record in advance and concurrently the specific ideas of a human inventor about a 'complete and operable invention' (especially the technical features in the final claims) that have already formed in their mind before or during contact with AI tools.
For example: the specific technical problems to be solved, the framework for the proposed solution, the detailed instructions provided to the AI and the iterative process, and the human decision-making logic used to distill the final solution from the AI’s outputs.
2
Positioning: Regard AI as an “advanced tool.”
The focus of examination is whether a human has mentally constructed the “complete invention.” If any part was entirely “conceived” by AI and adopted by the human without understanding, that part may not qualify as part of the patentable invention.
3
Compliance: Proactively adjust cross-border filing strategy.
Apple owns the VisionPro product, but the VisionPro trademark is held by Huawei. According to media reports, in addition to Huawei, several domestic companies own the “VisionPro” trademark, such as Wuxi Leiming Shikang and Rugao Haohua, with categories covering optical glasses, digital signage, goggles, and more.
4
Response: Prepare answers to examination inquiries in advance.
Prepare the aforementioned systematic process records in advance and ensure that they can be clearly mapped to the specific features of the claims. When filing the application, you may wish to include a detailed statement of the invention process that proactively explains the human contribution.
These four key points are interconnected, and all point to the fundamental principle of the USPTO's new policy:Only a natural person who can prove that they have completed the “mental construction” of the “complete invention” is qualified to be an inventor within the meaning of patent law.
Overview and Implications of the New Guidelines
Essence and Implications of the New Guidance
No matter how AI's capabilities evolve, it cannot attain the status of an “inventor” under U.S. patent law.The traditional rules governing ownership of inventions, determination of joint inventorship, and the principle of priority remain firmly rooted in the existing legal framework.
AI is expressly regarded as an advanced tool, rather than a co-inventor.This principle is consistently applied, regardless of whether the application is for a utility patent, design patent, or plant patent.
The new guidelines do not impose limitations; rather, they clear the fog. They affirm that the fruits of every innovation can be clearly attributed to human ingenuity and will receive robust legal protection. In the AI era, the true innovators will always be those who know how to harness tools and define problems with clarity.
Damai Intellectual Property has focused, and will continue to focus, on the intellectual property field—its past, present, and future alike. We will closely follow industry developments, policy shifts, and clients’ needs, striving to deliver “great products and great services.” Grounded in professionalism, guided by transparency, and committed to reliability, we will make steady progress and build on every accomplishment, with the ambition of creating a century-old brand in the intellectual property field and helping Chinese companies take their brands global and shine worldwide.
