Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 22,236 results that match your search.22,236 results
  • At the time Greece acceded to the European Patent Convention, a reservation was filed under article 167.2a by which patents providing protection to pharmaceutical products as such should not have effect in Greece. While the reservation expired in 1992, the effects of the reservation on patents filed while this was in effect would exist during the entire life of these patents.
  • A recent decision (Olivine Industries Pty Ltd v D H Brothers Pty Ltd) by the Zambia Registrar of Trade Marks enunciated her Office's "consistent" but controversial principle that oppositions cannot be based on unregistered marks.
  • Your brand faces multi-pronged attacks on the internet. Dan Smith and Bonita Trimmer provide a guide to repelling assaults from rivals, counterfeiters and domain name infringers
  • Many IP owners have sound commercial reasons for wanting to secure patent rights as quickly as possible. Here is a guide to getting patents granted faster by examiners in eight patent offices
  • The Austrian Supreme Court recently handed down a judgment that may answer some burning questions on patent infringement proceedings.
  • Charles Goemaere and Fabrice Mattei consider the lessons GI owners can learn from Champagne’s successful registrations in Thailand and Indonesia
  • The USPTO has issued updated guidelines for examiners with respect to determining whether or not an invention is obvious. In the past three years, there have been several significant cases that have clarified the KSR v Teleflex ruling on obviousness further. The new guidelines take into consideration a total of 24 Federal Circuit cases that have offered additional guidance for examiners on interpreting KSR. The Office has grouped the cases into four categories of teaching points: (1) combining prior art elements; (2) substituting one known element for another; (3) the obvious-to-try rationale; and (4) consideration of evidence. These include In re Kubin, Crocs v International Trade Commission, DePuy Spine v Medtronic, and Eisai v Dr Reddy's Labs. Robert Polit of McAndrews Held & Malloy said that the guidelines will be "very useful – if examiners decide to use them". The guidelines are open to public comment and suggestions should be sent by email to KSR_Guidance@uspto.gov. There is no deadline for submitting comments.
  • Eileen McDermott, New York
  • A distinction between lawyers and patent agents in Canada has caused uncertainty as to whether foreign attorneys’ communications with their clients will be privileged in Canadian courts. Alex Stack explains the implications
  • Managing IP lists the patent firms filing the most PCT applications in the 14 biggest markets