The much-trumpeted ratification of the London
Agreement will shortly deliver welcome fee reductions in patent
translation costs and it is believed, will come into effect on
01 May 2008. However, the Administrative Council of the EPO
quietly announced in mid-December that it is to raise its
fees.
The major cost increases of concern are to be found in the
claims fees and maintenance fees....
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
We have recently reported on the long-awaited decision of the United States Supreme Court in Bilski, which amongst other things, upheld the "machine or transformation" test as an "important tool" in determining patentable subject matter
In March 2010, we reported on continuing progress toward New Zealand's new Patents Act. Specifically, it was noted that, in its report to Parliament following public consultation on the Patents Bill 2008 (PB), the Commerce Select Committee provided a real "curveball" in purporting to now exclude computer software from patentability
Australia has just had its second Federal Court decision involving our rather controversial "second tier" patent system, the innovation patent. In the case, Seafood Innovations Pty Ltd v Richard Bass Pty Ltd [2010] FCA 723 (12 July 2010), the plaintiff sued over two innovation patents in the field of fish processing machinery. It is noteworthy that the second of the innovation patents was granted after the litigation had commenced and the plaintiff had seen a detailed response from the defendant
New Zealand is one of the few developed countries that retains a "local novelty" provision in its patents legislation. When assessing the patentability of an application, local novelty disregards any publication or use outside that particular jurisdiction. This, in theory, allows patent applicants to file in New Zealand after overseas publication, use, sale, or even the expiry of the 12-month Paris Convention period.
Harmonisation of patent laws and practices is occurring slowly but surely throughout the world. It follows that the less "idiosyncratic" a country’s laws and practices are, the cheaper and easier it should be to obtain patent protection in that country. Harmonisation thereby has potential benefits to Australian patent applicants seeking protection in countries closely aligned with our own patent system.
The Seventh Circuit affirmed the district court’s ruling that the declaratory-judgment defendant’s registered design for an x-frame chair was functional and thus unprotectable.
In this article Finnegan partner, Lawrence R. Robins, analyzes Barclays Capital Inc. v. THEFLYONTHEWALL.COM decision and discusses the implications for newspapers in protecting the value of their newsgathering.
Opposer’s opposition to Applicant’s registration of the mark MITHRIL for jewelry was sustained by the TTAB on the ground that Applicant lacked a bona fide intent to use the mark in commerce.
