PatentNext Takeaway: To date, the Federal Circuit has not reviewed many cases involving artificial intelligence (AI). However, in a recent case, the Federal Circuit found that a “machine learning” claim element lacked sufficient enablement because both the claim itself and the written description of the patent to which it belonged failed to describe “how” the claimed invention implemented this element. In view of this ruling, patent practitioners should endeavor to explain sufficiently in the written description the specific aspects of how machine learning features (and other computer-implemented invention features) operate in order to demonstrate sufficient enablement.
![Creative Designing & Engineering -- iStock-821018504 [Converted]](https://www.patentnext.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/990/2021/03/Creative-Designing-Engineering-iStock-821018504-Converted-e1617062069643.png)
