• Le Roy v. Tatham, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156 (1852),

• Weber, Emily N. "Balancing Purpose, Power, and Discretion Between Article III Courts and the Patent Office."  L. Rev.86 (2021): 1019.
• Liu, Weidong, et al. "Patent transformation opportunity to realize patent value: Discussion about the conditions to be used or exchanged." Information Processing & Management4 (2021): 102582.
• Weber, Emily N. "Balancing Purpose, Power, and Discretion Between Article III Courts and the Patent Office."  L. Rev.86 (2021): 1019.
• Liu, Weidong, et al. "Patent transformation opportunity to realize patent value: Discussion about the conditions to be used or exchanged." Information Processing & Management4 (2021): 102582.
• Ebrahim, Tabrez Y. "Artificial Intelligence Inventions & Patent Disclosure." Penn St. L. Rev.125 (2020): 147.   
• Yosuke Watanabe, " Inventor: Patent Inventorship for Artificial Intelligence Systems." 57 Idaho L. Rev. 475 (2021).
• Philip C. Jackson, Jr., Introduction To Artificial Intelligence 292 (Dover Publ’n, Inc., 2d ed. 1985)
• Mizuki Hashiguchi, The Global Artificial Intelligence Revolution Challenges Patent Eligibility Laws, 13 J. Bus. & Tech. L. 6 (2017)
• Chikhaoui, Emna, and Saghir Mehar. "Artificial intelligence (AI) collides with patent law." Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues2 (2020): 1
• Timothy L. Butler, Can a Computer be an Author - Copyright Aspects of Artificial Intelligence, 4 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 708 (1982).
• Schuster, W. Michael, and Gregory Day. "Colluding against a Patent."  L. Rev 537 (2021).
• Safrin, Sabrina. "The Predictive Power of Patents."  Ill. JL Tech. & Pol'y 43 (2021).
• Caleb A Holland " Prep" aring for a Challenge to Government-Owned Patents." 70 UL Rev. 493 (2021).
• Seokbeom Kwon, "The prevalence of weak patents in the United States: A new method to identify weak patents and the implications for patent policy “ 64 Technology in Society 101469 (2021).
• Mark A., Perry, and Jaysen S. Chung. "Alice at Six: Patent Eligibility Comes of Age." 20 -Kent J. Intell. Prop. 64 (2021).
• Jeonghun Jee, "Six different approaches to defining and identifying promising technology through patent analysis, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 1 (2021)
• Alaa Fotouh R. Mansour Bedair, "Insights into the FDA 2018 new drug approvals." Current Drug Discovery Technologies2 (2021): 293
• Jonas Anderson, Applying Patent-Eligible Subject Matter Restrictions, 17 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 274 (2020)
• Golden, John M. "Patentable Subject Matter and Institutional Choice."  L. Rev.89 (2010): 1041.
• Zhang, Li. "Alice Gets a Haircut: Berkheimer and Aatrix Restore Factual Inquiry to Patent Subject Matter Eligibility under Sec. 101." Berkeley Tech. LJ34 (2019): 1081.
• Marsnik, Susan J., and Robert E. Thomas. "Drawing a line in the patent subject-matter sands: does Europe provide a solution to the software and business method patent problem." BC Int'l & Comp. L. Rev.34 (2011): 234
• Menell, Peter S. "Forty Years of Wondering in the Wilderness and No Closer to the Promised Land: Bilski's Superficial Textualism and the Missed Opportunity to Return Patent Law to Its Technology Mooring."  L. Rev.63 (2010): 1295
• He, Jianxing, et al. "The practical implementation of artificial intelligence technologies in medicine." Nature medicine1 (2019): 30-36.
• Szolovits, Peter, ed. Artificial intelligence in medicine. Routledge, 2019.
• Ernest Fok "Challenging the International Trend: The Case for Artificial Intelligence Inventorship in the United States."19 Santa Clara J. Int'l L 51 (2021):.
• Romm, Connor. "Putting the Person in Phosita: The Human's Obvious Role in the Artificial Intelligence Era." BCL Rev.62 (2021): 1413.
• Reinbold, Patric M. "Taking Artificial Intelligence Beyond the Turing Test."  L. Rev.(2020): 873.
• Huhn, Michael. "Can an artificial intelligence model be the in-ventor of a molecule designed by the model and how can patentability be assessed?." Journal of Business Chemistry (2020): 4, 5
• Fabris, Daniele. "From the PHOSITA to the MOSITA: Will “Secondary Considerations” Save Pharmaceutical Patents from Artificial Intelligence?." IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law6 (2020): 696
• Schlander, Michael, et al. "How much does it cost to research and develop a new drug? A systematic review and assessment." PharmacoEconomics11 (2021): 1243-1269.
• Vertinsky L, Rice TM (2002) Thinking about thinking machines: implications of machine inventors for patent law. Boston Univ J Sci Technol Law 8:574
• Katopis, Chris J. "The Curious Crypto Question: Do Patents Advance Fintech Innovation? The Paradox Arising from Five Key Recent Trends." Santa Clara High Tech. LJ38 (2021): 1.
• Gurgula, Olga. "AI-assisted inventions in the field of drug discovery: readjusting the inventive step analysis." International Journal of Social Science and Public Policy, Forthcoming(2020).

• World Intellectual Property Organization, Examination Guideline Part 3 Chapter 3, Section 4, 5
• https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/scp/en/meetings/session_22/comments_received/republic_of_korea.pdf
• Jack Clark, Why 2015 Was a Breakthrough Year in Artificial Intelligence, BLOOMBERG TECH. (Dec. 8, 2015, 8:00 AM), https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-12-08/why-2015-was-a-breakthrough-year- in-artificial-intelligence.

·             Patents and Artificial Intelligence: An ‘Obvious’ Slippery Slope https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/patents-and-artificial-intelligence-an-obvious-slippery-slope

• Al-Shorfa: Intellectual Property Rights Protection Act No. 82 of 2002

• Al-Shorfa: Director of the Patent Office: Paris Agreement obligates us to "examine"

• Le Roy v. Tatham, 55 U.S. (14 How.) 156 (1852),

• Weber, Emily N. "Balancing Purpose, Power, and Discretion Between Article III Courts and the Patent Office." Mo. L. Rev.86 (2021): 1019.
• Liu, Weidong, et al. "Patent transformation opportunity to realize patent value: Discussion about the conditions to be used or exchanged." Information Processing & Management58.4 (2021): 102582.
• Weber, Emily N. "Balancing Purpose, Power, and Discretion Between Article III Courts and the Patent Office." Mo. L. Rev.86 (2021): 1019.
• Liu, Weidong, et al. "Patent transformation opportunity to realize patent value: Discussion about the conditions to be used or exchanged." Information Processing & Management4 (2021): 102582.
• Ebrahim, Tabrez Y. "Artificial Intelligence Inventions & Patent Disclosure." Penn St. L. Rev.125 (2020): 147.      
• Yosuke Watanabe, " Inventor: Patent Inventorship for Artificial Intelligence Systems." 57 Idaho L. Rev. 475 (2021).
• Philip C. Jackson, Jr., Introduction To Artificial Intelligence 292 (Dover Publ’n, Inc., 2d ed. 1985)
• Mizuki Hashiguchi, The Global Artificial Intelligence Revolution Challenges Patent Eligibility Laws, 13 J. Bus. & Tech. L. 6 (2017)
• Chikhaoui, Emna, and Saghir Mehar. "Artificial intelligence (AI) collides with patent law." Journal of Legal, Ethical and Regulatory Issues2 (2020): 1
• Timothy L. Butler, Can a Computer be an Author - Copyright Aspects of Artificial Intelligence, 4 Hastings Comm. & Ent. L.J. 708 (1982).
• Schuster, W. Michael, and Gregory Day. "Colluding against a Patent."  L. Rev 537 (2021).
• Safrin, Sabrina. "The Predictive Power of Patents."  Ill. JL Tech. & Pol'y 43 (2021).
• Caleb A Holland " Prep" aring for a Challenge to Government-Owned Patents." 70 UL Rev. 493 (2021).
• Seokbeom Kwon, "The prevalence of weak patents in the United States: A new method to identify weak patents and the implications for patent policy “ 64 Technology in Society 101469 (2021).
• Mark A., Perry, and Jaysen S. Chung. "Alice at Six: Patent Eligibility Comes of Age." 20 -Kent J. Intell. Prop. 64 (2021).
• Jeonghun Jee, "Six different approaches to defining and identifying promising technology through patent analysis, Technology Analysis & Strategic Management 1 (2021)
• Alaa Fotouh R. Mansour Bedair, "Insights into the FDA 2018 new drug approvals." Current Drug Discovery Technologies2 (2021): 293
• Jonas Anderson, Applying Patent-Eligible Subject Matter Restrictions, 17 Vanderbilt Journal of Entertainment and Technology Law 274 (2020)
• Golden, John M. "Patentable Subject Matter and Institutional Choice."  L. Rev.89 (2010): 1041.
• Zhang, Li. "Alice Gets a Haircut: Berkheimer and Aatrix Restore Factual Inquiry to Patent Subject Matter Eligibility under Sec. 101." Berkeley Tech. LJ34 (2019): 1081.
• Marsnik, Susan J., and Robert E. Thomas. "Drawing a line in the patent subject-matter sands: does Europe provide a solution to the software and business method patent problem." BC Int'l & Comp. L. Rev.34 (2011): 234
• Menell, Peter S. "Forty Years of Wondering in the Wilderness and No Closer to the Promised Land: Bilski's Superficial Textualism and the Missed Opportunity to Return Patent Law to Its Technology Mooring."  L. Rev.63 (2010): 1295
• He, Jianxing, et al. "The practical implementation of artificial intelligence technologies in medicine." Nature medicine1 (2019): 30-36.
• Szolovits, Peter, ed. Artificial intelligence in medicine. Routledge, 2019.
• Ernest Fok "Challenging the International Trend: The Case for Artificial Intelligence Inventorship in the United States."19 Santa Clara J. Int'l L 51 (2021):.
• Romm, Connor. "Putting the Person in Phosita: The Human's Obvious Role in the Artificial Intelligence Era." BCL Rev.62 (2021): 1413.
• Reinbold, Patric M. "Taking Artificial Intelligence Beyond the Turing Test."  L. Rev.(2020): 873.
• Huhn, Michael. "Can an artificial intelligence model be the in-ventor of a molecule designed by the model and how can patentability be assessed?." Journal of Business Chemistry (2020): 4, 5
• Fabris, Daniele. "From the PHOSITA to the MOSITA: Will “Secondary Considerations” Save Pharmaceutical Patents from Artificial Intelligence?." IIC-International Review of Intellectual Property and Competition Law6 (2020): 696
• Schlander, Michael, et al. "How much does it cost to research and develop a new drug? A systematic review and assessment." PharmacoEconomics11 (2021): 1243-1269.
• Vertinsky L, Rice TM (2002) Thinking about thinking machines: implications of machine inventors for patent law. Boston Univ J Sci Technol Law 8:574
• Katopis, Chris J. "The Curious Crypto Question: Do Patents Advance Fintech Innovation? The Paradox Arising from Five Key Recent Trends." Santa Clara High Tech. LJ38 (2021): 1.
• Gurgula, Olga. "AI-assisted inventions in the field of drug discovery: readjusting the inventive step analysis." International Journal of Social Science and Public Policy, Forthcoming(2020).

• World Intellectual Property Organization, Examination Guideline Part 3 Chapter 3, Section 4, 5
• https://www.wipo.int/export/sites/www/scp/en/meetings/session_22/comments_received/republic_of_korea.pdf
• Jack Clark, Why 2015 Was a Breakthrough Year in Artificial Intelligence, BLOOMBERG TECH. (Dec. 8, 2015, 8:00 AM),

·             Patents and Artificial Intelligence: An ‘Obvious’ Slippery Slope

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/ip-law/patents-and-artificial-intelligence-an-obvious-slippery-slope