Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up – 23 May 2014
An Australian Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up from the Commonwealth Courts portal for the week ending 23 May 2014.
An Australian Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up from the Commonwealth Courts portal for the week ending 23 May 2014.
The recent decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Damorgold Pty Ltd v JAI Products Pty Ltd [2014] FCA 150 has provided some useful guidance as to when prior public use of an invention constitutes prior art for the purposes of assessing the novelty and inventiveness of a patented invention. The decision also sets …
>> Read more
Below is a report from IP Organisers (an independent service company of Phillips Ormonde Fitzpatrick) detailing Australian Pharmaceutical Patents (that have been granted extensions) and that are due to expire in the coming month.
An Australian Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up from the Commonwealth Courts portal for the week ending 16 May 2014.
The Victorian Government have announced that applications are open for the 2014 Victorian Premier’s Design Awards. Details can be found here.
An Australian Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up from the Commonwealth Courts portal for the week ending 9 May 2014.
Whilst the IP Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 made substantial changes to the law of sufficiency, for many patents the previous law continues to apply. Following the High Court decision in Kimberly-Clark Australia v Arico Trading it was generally understood that the test for sufficiency would be satisfied if the disclosure of the …
>> Read more
An Australian Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up from the Commonwealth Courts portal for the week ending 2 May 2014.
An Australian Intellectual Property Litigation Round-Up from the Commonwealth Courts portal for the period of 14 April 2014 to 25 April 2014.
Alphapharm has been granted special leave to appeal to the High Court against the decision in Aspen Pharma Pty Ltd v H Lundbeck A/S [2013] FCAFC 129. Leave was granted in relation to the Full Court’s findings that patentee Lundbeck could rely on section 223 (extensions of time) in respect of its application for an …
>> Read more