Search results for

Managing IP rounds up the latest news and analysis from patent-focused businesses

The minimum requirements for securing a filing date (and priority date) of a Malaysian patent application to be issued by the Malaysian IP Office (MyIPO) are: a) the name and address of the applicant(s), b) the name and address of the inventor(s), c) a patent specification comprising a description, claims and any necessary drawings; and d) the country and filing date of any earlier application whose priority is claimed. It is preferable, although not essential, to file the following additional information and documents with the initial application; e) the serial number of any priority application and the symbol of the International Patent Classification (IPC) allocated to it (if available), f) the state of incorporation/nationality of the applicant; g) an abstract of the invention; h) an Appointment of Agent form signed by the applicant and i) if the applicant is not the inventor, a statement explaining how the applicant derives its right to the patent from the inventor(s), normally by virtue of assignment, employment or any other agreement.

As data reveals that German and French attorneys lag behind their UK counterparts on the tests for appearing at the EPO, Managing IP asks why the UK leads the field

Volvo Cars, Lotus and others say car companies are becoming more accepting of suppliers using open source technology as their need for software increases, but that they have to be more vigilant of restrictive licences as a result

In-house counsel from generic drug companies believe pharma innovators are abusing divisional patent filings to give them extra protection

Counsel at Capital One, Wells Fargo and the Clearing House Payments Company say they file patents when there is an appropriate business case and only look at patent eligibility requirements as a secondary issue

The right of trademark owners to exclude others from using identical or similar marks has been limited by the principle of trademark exhaustion. Once a trademark owner has placed products on the market, the right of a trademark owner to control further circulation of its trademarked product is exhausted. The resale by the first purchaser of the original products is not deemed as trademark infringement. Although there are no provisions regarding the exhaustion of trademark rights under China's Trademark Law, Chinese courts typically uphold this doctrine.

Increasingly, law firms strive for a solely digital file system without significant use of paper files. A fully digital deadline management system seems to be the logical consequence.

The Ministry of Business, Innovation and Employment (MBIE) has released a discussion paper inviting submissions on potential amendments to New Zealand's patent, trademark, and design legislation.

As Taiwan is not a signatory to the Budapest Treaty, the effect of a deposit made in an international depositary under the Budapest Treaty is generally not recognised in Taiwan. Accordingly, even though a biological material has been deposited in an international depositary in order to meet the enabling requirement, the applicant is still required to make a corresponding deposit in a domestic depositary designated by the Taiwan Intellectual Property Office (TIPO). A late deposit will be deemed valid only if the certificates of deposit issued by both the international and domestic depositaries are filed before a statutory deadline, i.e. within four months from the filing date or sixteen months from the earliest priority date claimed, whichever is applicable. Further, in the event that a deposit is deemed invalid, the applicant may file a request for reinstatement of the deposit procedure within thirty days from the day following the cessation of the cause for delay.