Search results for

Since the first marketing authorisation for a monoclonal antibody (Mab) in the 1980s, the patent system has never stopped adding the fuel of interest to the fire of Mabs ingenuity.

Christian Liedtke of Acuminis examines the possibly far-reaching changes to US trademark practice rules seeking to abolish the ability of foreign trademark holders to represent themselves in trademark matters before the USPTO and its Trademark Trial and Appeal Board

The Australian government subsidises access to approved drugs via the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS). Under the scheme, the majority of the approved drug's cost is borne by the government in order to improve patient access.

It is quite encouraging for law practitioners in Greece that Greek IP specialised courts have managed to align national case law with EU case law on trademarks during the last decade, providing a tool for legal certainty.

Two issues have arisen recently causing the Technical Boards of Appeal to refer questions to the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA).

The US Federal Circuit has imposed restrictions on who can appeal against an inter partes review decision, making life difficult for some petitioners. However, there are some practical tips to consider, as Rose Cordero Prey and Eric Ding of Greenberg Traurig explain

In this increasingly transparent and closely connected world, trade secrets are becoming an effective way to protect certain intellectual assets. It is widely recognised that trade secrets can help a company maintain its competitive edge. Customer lists are often among a company's most valuable assets. Safeguarding this information may be critical to the success of a company. It is taken for granted that customer lists are treated as trade secrets which are protected by law. However, in reality, this is not always true. In China, a customer list must satisfy certain criteria in order to be considered a trade secret and thus entitled to legal protection.

One feature of Taiwan's Patent Law (and all the country's IP laws) that many patentees find interesting is the lack of indirect infringement. To seek remedies against suppliers (mainly contract manufacturers, or CMs) of essential elements of a patented invention, patentees need resort to the Civil Code rules regarding the liabilities for assisting torts.

The possibility of invalidating a patent is clearly set out in Vietnam's intellectual property laws. Historically, however, although thousands of patents are granted each year in Vietnam, the number of requests for invalidation has been extremely small. Nearly all of these cases have occurred in the context of patent disputes where the sanctioned party (in administrative measures) or defendant (in judicial measures) has been accused of patent infringement, and has attempted to invalidate the patent in question as a defence mechanism, with the argument that if a patent is not valid, it cannot be infringed.

Trademark professionals may be familiar with the Thai Trademark Appeal Board (TTAB), a body encountered when a trademark applicant wishes to appeal any decision of the Thai trademark registrar. The TTAB is established by the Trademark Act B.E. 2534, comprising 11-15 members chosen by the Cabinet from the Council of State, the judiciary and experts in international trade and IP. Section 96 of the Trademark Act empowers the TTAB to examine all appeals and cancellation petitions filed under the act. The TTAB's duties and powers regarding examination of appeals are regulated by various versions of the TTAB's Regulations on the Procedure for Examination of Appeal and Cancellation Petitions. On March 25 2019, a new edition of the regulations will come into force, with repercussions expected to be felt by most trademark applicants in Thailand.