IP Litigation – IP Law Watch

Dividing and Conquering: Best Method Obligations Follow Every Divisional Patent Application

Apr 15 2026

In an important decision, the Full Federal Court in The NOCO Company v Brown and Watson International¹ held that the relevant date for assessing the best method known to the applicants is the filing date of each divisional application. This judgment carries significant implications for patent filing and litigation strategies, as patentees must consider the adequacy of the best method disclosures in existing and future divisional patent specifications.

USPTO Introduces Patent Owner Pre Order Submission on SNQ in Ex Parte Reexam

Apr 07 2026

In an Official Gazette notice dated 1 April 2026, the USPTO announced a new procedure allowing patent owners to submit a limited “pre order” paper addressing whether a third party ex parte reexamination request raises a Substantial New Question (SNQ) of patentability under 35 U.S.C. § 303(a).

Fame Isn’t Everything: Australian Designer Trumps Popstar After Long-Running KATY/KATIE PERRY Trade Mark Dispute

Mar 19 2026

The High Court of Australia has handed down its highly anticipated decision in Taylor v Killer Queen LLC [2026] HCA 5 in a narrow 3-2 majority, ending a decade-long trade mark battle between American pop star Katy Perry (born Katheryn Hudson) and Australian fashion designer Katie Taylor (born Katie Perry).

Questions to AI Models May Be Discoverable

Feb 25 2026

On 17 February 2026 in U.S. v. Heppner, 1:25-cr-503 (S.D.N.Y., Feb. 17, 2026), Judge Rakoff held that a defendant’s written exchanges with a public generative AI platform were not protected by the attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine. The Government had seized approximately thirty-one documents memorializing the defendant’s interactions with the public platform. Defense counsel asserted privilege because the inputs included attorney-learned information, were created to facilitate consultations with counsel, and were later shared with counsel.

PTAB Reinforces Preference for PGR

Jan 14 2026

The Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) recently designated a post-grant review (PGR) decision as precedential. In the decision, the Director issued a discretionary denial decision confirming that the proper analysis was a “totality of the circumstances” type analysis, taking into account all facts and arguments presented by the parties.

USPTO Proposes Rule Changes to Refocus Inter Partes Review Proceedings

Oct 17 2025

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) has proposed significant changes to the rules governing Inter Partes Review (IPR) proceedings before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB). These revisions aim to enhance fairness, efficiency, and predictability in patent disputes, while curbing duplicative and costly litigation. Notably, these changes do not apply to Post-Grant Review (proceedings that must be filed within nine months of the patent issue date).

All Eyes on EYLEA–Sandoz Defeats Preliminary Injunction

Sep 22 2025

The recent decision in Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc v Sandoz shows how a strong noninfringement position can be powerful to resisting a preliminary injunction. The dismissal of the Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (Regeneron) and Bayer Australia Ltd and Bayer Consumer Care AG (together Bayer) parties’ application for interlocutory relief aligns with the recent trend away from granting preliminary (interlocutory) injunctions in pharmaceutical patent cases. While the trend has primarily arisen from the court’s recognition that the calculation of damages for a new market entrant is likely to be more difficult than that for the patentee, this was a, but not the main driving, factor in this case.

Sage Advice from the Federal Court: Stylisation of Collab Marks

Sep 19 2025

In Paige v Sage and Paige¹, the Federal Court considered the existence of brand collaborations in the fashion industry, colloquially known as “collabs”, in assessing the deceptive similarity of trade marks.

Federal Circuit’s First Foray Into AIA-Derivation Proceedings

Sep 11 2025

The Federal Circuit recently issued its first review of a derivation proceeding, a rarely used proceeding provided for by the America Invents Act (AIA).

Let’s Make it a Date–Best Method and the Filing Date of the Earliest Complete Application

Aug 11 2025

In the recent decision of NOCO Company v. Brown and Watson International Pty Ltd [2025] FCA 887¹, Moshinsky J has provided welcomed clarity around the relevant date by which the best method known to the applicant is to be identified for divisional patent applications. Namely, the relevant date is the date from which the term of the patent is calculated. This means that for divisional patent applications, it is the filing date of the earliest complete or PCT application, not the individual filing date of each divisional application. And thus, it is at the time of filing the PCT application that the best method known to the applicant needs to be included in the specification.

Category:IP Litigation