Thaler (DABUS) v. Commissioner of the Korean Intellectual Property Office (Korea)

Summary

Stephen Thaler's PCT patent application naming his AI system DABUS as the sole inventor entered the Korean national phase on May 17, 2021. The Korean Intellectual Property Office asked for the inventor to be changed to a natural person and, when it was not, invalidated the application in September 2022. Thaler challenged the invalidation in court on December 20, 2022. The Seoul Administrative Court upheld it on June 30, 2023, relying on Article 33 of the Korean Patent Act, and the Seoul High Court affirmed on May 16, 2024 (Case No. 2023Nu52088), adding that AI lacks legal capacity under the Civil Act. Thaler appealed to the Supreme Court of Korea on June 18, 2024. The Artificial Inventor Project, which runs Thaler's applications, listed the Korean appeal as pending on its page updated March 6, 2026, and the Korean intellectual property authority's own page on AI inventorship, last revised July 31, 2026, records the case only up to the High Court ruling. No Supreme Court decision has been reported.

Key dates

1. May 17, 2021Filed
2. October 20, 2026Checked against sources
3. October 21, 2026Checked against sources

Developments are added when the record is reviewed. Next review: January 20, 2027.

Evidence

Each passage is quoted from its source. The quoted passages are re-checked against the live pages every month.

1. entered the Korean national phase on May 17, 2021 (Korean Appl. No. 10-2020-7007394). The PCT application listed an AI machine called "Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience (DABUS)" as the sole inventor.

   Supports: Application and national phase date

   On May 16, 2024, the Seoul High Court, reviewing the case on appeal from the SAC, rendered a ruling affirming the SAC's decision.

   Supports: High Court ruling date

   The applicant has appealed the High Court decision to Korean Supreme Court on June 18, 2024.

   Supports: Supreme Court appeal

   The SAC specifically relied on Article 33 of the KPA

   Supports: Seoul Administrative Court relied on Article 33 of the Korean Patent Act

   Under Articles 3 and 34 of the Korean Civil Act, only a natural person or a corporation can be endowed with legal capacity.

   Supports: High Court reasoning on legal capacity under the Civil Act

   High Court Reaffirms Artificial Intelligence (AI) Cannot Be an Inventor in Korea Kim & Chang (newsletter dated 2024.07.19) Reporting or analysis

2. The decision of the High Court has been appealed to the Korean Supreme Court on June 18, 2024. The outcome is anticipated with great interest.

   Supports: Appeal pending as of December 2024

   Can Artificial Intelligence (AI) Be an Inventor? The Answer Is "No" in Korea Asian Patent Attorneys Association (e-Newsletter No. 44, December 2024) Reporting or analysis

3. AI는 자연인이 아니므로 발명자가 될 수 없다는 이유로 보정요구('22.2)하였으나, 발명자를 자연인으로 보정하지 않아 무효처분('22.9)

   Supports: Office asked for a natural-person inventor (Feb 2022) and invalidated the application (Sep 2022)

   무효처분에 대해 행정소송* 제기('22.12.20)하였으나, 서울지방행정법원에서 무효처분의 효력을 인정하였으며('23.6.30), 2심인 서울고등법원에서도 무효처분의 효력을 인정('24.5.16)

   Supports: Suit filed 20 Dec 2022; Seoul Administrative Court 30 Jun 2023; Seoul High Court May 16, 2024; the page lists no Supreme Court ruling

   최종수정일 : 2026-07-31

   Supports: Page last revised July 31, 2026

   인공지능 발명자 이슈 (AI inventor issue) 지식재산처 (Korean intellectual property authority, formerly the Korean Intellectual Property Office) Primary source

4. denied with appeals pending (Canada, Brazil, Republic of Korea, New Zealand, and China)

   Supports: Korean appeal listed as pending

   Republic of Korea Seoul High Court Case No. 2023Nu52088, May 16, 2024

   Supports: High Court case number and date; the latest Korean entry listed

   Last Updated: March 6, 2026

   Supports: Date of the pending-appeal listing

   Patent – The Artificial Inventor Project The Artificial Inventor Project (Ryan Abbott; the applicant's pro bono test-case project) Reporting or analysis