Search results for

Officina Profumo farmaceutica di Santa Maria Novella SpA – a 400-year-old company based in Florence, Italy – and its trade mark consultants at Bugnion SpA can claim victory against Chinese trade mark squatters. On October 11 2017 the Italian producer of luxury cosmetics won its oppositions before the CTMO, the Chinese Trademark Office, against a Chinese individual, CAI Zhifeng, who filed in bad faith the company's house mark:

Since the activity of the pharmaceutical industry is a regulated activity, in the sense that medicaments require governmental authorisation in order to be commercialised, registering the trade mark with the Trademark Office – as intellectual property right – is not sufficient to guarantee its use in the pharmaceutical product, because the name of the medicament must be accepted by a health authority at the time of issuance of the marketing and sales authorisation.

Registration of sound marks in Thailand has been legally possible since the Thai Trademark Act (No. 3) B.E. 2558 (A.D. 2015) came into force on July 28 2016. However, such registrations remained only a possibility that didn't mature into reality. On September 1 2017, new Ministerial Regulations were issued and guidelines published that provide clarification on the sound mark application process in Thailand as well as details on how to properly complete the revised trade mark application form to claim protection for sound marks.

The decree law pertaining to the protection of patent rights was in force between 1995 and 2017. As per to decree law the rules on how to determine the amount of compensation to be paid to an employee in case of full or partial claim on invention was to be regulated by a regulation. However this regulation was never prepared or enacted.

This March, the IP Court awarded respective triple damages against an infringer on the ground of willful violation of both the Patent Law and the Fair Trade Act in an infringement lawsuit filed by HTC, a Taiwan-based smartphone maker.

The ultimate purpose of a Supplementary Protection Certificate (SPC) is to compensate a patentee for the time lost due to lengthy regulatory approval processes.

As previously discussed in this column, the Boards of Appeal of the EPO have a few tools at their disposal, which they use to conduct EPO appeal proceedings efficiently. In particular, Article 12(2) of the Rules of Procedure of the Boards of Appeal (RPBA) requires appellants to provide their complete case in their statement of grounds of appeal or response to an appeal.

The electric vehicle (EV) market is expanding more than expected, and battery manufacturers and component manufacturers are accelerating investments in lithium ion battery equipment across the globe. Under this circumstance, a lawsuit was filed against infringement of a patent for a lithium ion battery.

When talking about reserva rights – a legal institution exclusive to the Mexican legal system, which protects a variety of assets, such as titles of publications or broadcasts, among others– there is a problem that stands out: an absence of certainty regarding the criteria used by the authority (the Mexican Copyright Office, or INDAUTOR) when examining applications.

Recent patent infringement cases in Vietnam's pharmaceutical sector have revealed the ambiguity of competent authorities' roles in determining whether a patent has been infringed. Such vagueness has caused unexpected delays in legal proceedings.