Search results for

Patent term extension is available for patents relating to pharmaceutical products (excluding animal drugs) in Taiwan. An extension application should be filed within three months of the date the approval certificate is obtained and at least six months before the patent is due to expire.

US trade mark law allows for the filing of a trade mark application based on a bona fide intention to use the mark on or in connection with the specified goods or services listed in the application. The filing of an intent-to-use-based application provides a significant benefit to trade mark owners as it allows them to obtain a priority date as of the date of filing while they develop their business under such mark. This can protect the owner from the subsequent adoption of a confusingly similar mark by a third party during the time period between when the owner has filed its application and when it has put the mark into use. The ability to file an application on an intent-to-use basis can, therefore, be crucial to the development of a brand owner's business.

Companies' competitive power is related – to a great extent – to their capacity and ability to generate and manage technological and commercial information and knowledge. Under certain circumstances, that information needs to be kept confidential, for example: when it entails a competitive advantage over third parties; when the less the knowledge is disclosed the more its economic value increases; and when it implies the power to disclose that information to other interested parties willing to pay for said disclosure.

The highest French court (Cour de Cassation) has recently given its ruling in a case related to patent limitation.

A new EU Anti-Piracy Regulation is set to enter into force on January 1. Hidde Koenraad looks at the main changes, and what rights owners can benefit from them

A recent decision of the Ontario Superior Court of Justice underscores the importance of drafting clear and unambiguous terms in settlement agreements.

The way in which the European Patent Office acts in the case of a lack of unity during the search procedure has recently been re-assessed. The problem which gave rise to the change is best illustrated by an example:

The risk of genericism is a real one for many trade mark owners. John Wilks and Kate Oldroyd explain what you can do to avoid it

On February 8 2010, the mark Juicy Love was published for opposition in the E-Gazette of the Intellectual Property Office of the Philippines (IPOPHL). Juicy Couture and LC Licensing of the United States filed a motion for extension of time to file a verified opposition on March 9 2010, and subsequently filed two more extensions of 30 days each as allowed by the inter partes rules then in force. Finally, on the last day, June 8 2010, Juicy Couture filed its verified opposition, but failed to pay the filing fees. Henc the Director of the Bureau of Legal Affairs (BLA) dismissed the opposition citing as basis Section 7.2 of the rules, which provides that the prescribed fees shall be paid upon the filing of the opposition; otherwise, the opposition shall be considered as not filed. Juicy Couture filed a motion for reconsideration, and also paid the filing fees which it claimed it had inadvertently overlooked. The Director denied the motion for reconsideration.

A recent IP High Court decision in Japan brought clarification on product-by-process claims. Steve Comer and Chie Yakura explain how to adapt for both patent prosecution and litigation