Search results for

The Supreme Court will hear Life Techs v Promega but denied cert in the controversial Sequenom v Ariosa case, which patent watchers had hoped would ease their Section 101 pain

Social media such as Skype, Facebook and internet message boards can be used to serve court papers in Singapore, the High Court ruled in Storey, David Ian Andrew v Planet Arkadia

Managing IP answers your questions about the impact of Brexit on IP

Following the UK's June 23 vote to leave the EU, many law and IP firms have published advice for clients. We provide links to the relevant articles

European countries scored well in the latest Global IP Index, published by law firm Taylor Wessing, but the United States plunged to 24th place. That is in stark contrast to another index of IP regimes, published by the Global IP Center in February this year

The US Supreme Court has affirmed the PTAB’s standard for claim construction, in what some see as a blow to patent owners. Natalie Rahhal examines the Cuozzo case

As the European Commission aspires to introduce a Unitary SPC, Tony Rollins examines the evidence on how effective the existing regime for patent extension in Europe has been

Genomic technology has rapidly created a multi-billion dollar growth industry. With life sciences companies scrambling in US and European courts for a share of the lucrative market, in-house IP counsel should start preparing for the next wave of IP litigation, explain Dominic Adair and Annsley Merelle Ward

On June 1 2016, the proposed amendment to the Mexican Industrial Property Law (IPL) was published in the Federal Government Gazette, containing several modifications relating to the inclusion of provisions on opposition rights to third parties within trade mark application procedures before the Mexican Institute of Industrial Property (IMPI).

In The Netherlands there are two theories concerning the scope of protection of designs with technical features, more specifically the scope of protection of their technical elements. The first one is the so-called apparaat gerichteleer (apparatus-focused doctrine). According to this theory, every design element of a product which is technical or functional should be excluded from design protection. The other one is the so-called resultaat gerichteleer (result-focused doctrine). This theory holds that design protection of technical or functional elements of a product is possible as long as there are alternative technical or functional elements at hand to achieve the same result.