Tag: Prosecution

1
New Intellectual Property (Dispute Resolution) Bill In Singapore
2
Webpage specimens not automatically use in commerce
3
Federal Circuit holds that reissue application of hemodialysis shunt patent impermissibly recaptured surrendered subject matter
4
Getting closer to put the UPC into force
5
Significant changes ahead for Australian patents
6
European Copyright Reform
7
Is Australia’s Innovation Patent System on Borrowed Time?
8
Louboutin Succeeds Again in Long Standing European Union Trade Mark Opposition Over Red Sole
9
Single Patent Filing and Examination in Australia and New Zealand Almost a Reality
10
IP Australia Rejects MH370 Trade Mark Application

New Intellectual Property (Dispute Resolution) Bill In Singapore

On 8 July 2019, the Intellectual Property (Dispute Resolution) Bill (Bill) was tabled in Parliament, after a public consultation on the draft Bill that was conducted in March 2019 by the Singapore Ministry of Law.

The Bill aims to ensure that the Singapore Intellectual Property (IP) regime continues to support innovative activities in Singapore and positions Singapore as a choice of venue for international IP dispute resolution.

Read More

Webpage specimens not automatically use in commerce

On April 10, 2019, the Federal Circuit issued a precedential opinion, at the request of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO), regarding submissions of webpages as specimens of use. In re Siny Corp is an important reminder to applicants and practitioners to carefully consider whether webpage specimens to be submitted to the USPTO actually comprise the offering of goods and/or services at the point of sale, or whether they are mere advertising.

Read More

Federal Circuit holds that reissue application of hemodialysis shunt patent impermissibly recaptured surrendered subject matter

The Federal Circuit, in a nonprecedential decision, held that claims of a reissue application were properly rejected because they recaptured subject matter surrendered during the original prosecution of U.S. Patent No. 8,282,591 (“the ’591 patent”).[1]

The ’591 patent is directed to an arteriovenous shunt that connects a graft to an artery and passes returned blood through a “single lumen venous outflow catheter” into the right atrium of a patient’s heart.  This system reduces the risk of infection, clotting, and hyperplasia compared to systems that remove and return blood through a graft connected to a vein.[2]

Read More

Getting closer to put the UPC into force

April 26, 2018 is a remarkable date: first it’s World IP Day celebrating IP around the world. Second, and this is unique, the British IP Minister Sam Gyimah MP announced that the UK ratified the Unified Patent Court Agreement (UPC Agreement). By doing so the UK agreed to be bound to both the UPC agreement and the UPC’s Protocol on Privileges and Immunities (PPI). The UPC will be a court common to the contracting member states within the EU having exclusive competence in respect of European Patents and European Patents with unitary effect.

Read More

Significant changes ahead for Australian patents

The Australian Government has proposed significant changes to Australian patent law following an inquiry into the IP system recently completed by its advisory body, the Productivity Commission.  These include:

  • Amending the inventive step threshold to reflect that of the European Patent Office
  • Phasing out innovation patents
  • Requiring applicants to identify an invention’s technical features in their claims, and
  • Adding an objects clause to the Patents Act.

Read More

European Copyright Reform

By Alessandra Bellani and Alessandra Feller

On December 9 2015 the European Commission presented a proposal for European Copyright reform. The proposed framework, inspired by the European digital single market project, aims to provide European users with wider content and strengthen copyright protection, as well as ensure authors a fair remuneration.

Read More

Is Australia’s Innovation Patent System on Borrowed Time?

On 5 August 2015, the Australian Patent Office (IP Australia) released a consultation paper seeking feedback from interested stakeholders on the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property’s (ACIP) recommendation that the Australian Government should abolish the innovation patent system.

Introduced in 2001 under the Howard Government, the innovation patent system is Australia’s second tier patent right having a shorter term,eight  years, and a lower threshold of invention (i.e. an ‘innovative step’ as opposed to an ‘inventive step’ required for a standard patent).

Read More

Louboutin Succeeds Again in Long Standing European Union Trade Mark Opposition Over Red Sole

Christian Louboutin (Louboutin) has again been successful in a long running opposition proceeding filed by Roland SE (Roland) against its red sole trade mark in the European Union.

Louboutin has faced legal challenges around the world in registering and enforcing its signature red sole on its shoes.  In 2010, Louboutin filed a Community Trade Mark application for the below trade mark in class 25 for “high-heeled shoes (except orthopaedic footwear)” (Louboutin Mark):
shoe

 

(Louboutin Mark)

 

 

Read More

Single Patent Filing and Examination in Australia and New Zealand Almost a Reality

As we reported late last year, the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Bill 2014 was read by the Australian House of Representatives. On 9 February 2015, the bill passed the Australia Senate and will soon become law in Australia as the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment Act 2015.

One significant aspect of the new law is the introduction of a Single Application Process (SAP) and a Single Examination Process (SEP) for Australia and New Zealand patent applications. Read More

IP Australia Rejects MH370 Trade Mark Application

On 8 March 2014, Malaysian Airlines flight 370 disappeared. Five days later, Aoan International Pty Ltd (Aoan) filed an application to register MH370 as a trade mark in class 41 of the NICE classification of goods and services for various services.

IP Australia initially rejected the application under section 41 of the Trade Marks Act 1995 (Cth) (Act) on the basis that other traders should be entitled to refer to MH370 with respect to the services proposed to be offered by Aoan. IP Australia then reconsidered its decision and decided to reject the application under section 42(a) of the Act saying that the trade mark was scandalous on the basis that the trade mark would offend a section of the community. Read More

Copyright © 2019, K&L Gates LLP. All Rights Reserved.