Search results for

In determining the scope of patent protection in China, the question of support for the claims has come into focus, particularly for bio-medical inventions. Wenhui Zhang and Stephen Zou review some recent decisions

Our latest UPC scenario looks at a case involving a standard-essential patent. Michael Carter, Nick Cunningham and David Barron consider a defendant’s options in the new court system

Till Lampel and Martina Pfaff review recent decisions from German courts regarding trade marks, in particular some notable decisions from the Federal Supreme Court

US courts have long held that consent agreements should be given "great weight" by the USPTO when determining whether there is a likelihood of confusion between an applied-for mark and an existing registration. Indeed, the USPTO's Trademark Manual of Examining Procedure (TMEP) specifically states that the USPTO "should not substitute its judgment concerning likelihood of confusion for the judgment of the real parties in interest without good reason, that is, unless the other relevant factors clearly dictate a finding of a likelihood of confusion". Recently, however, in In re Bay State Brewing Company, Inc, the Trademark Trial and Appeal Board (TTAB) issued a precedential decision in which it decided to affirm a likelihood of confusion refusal, notwithstanding the fact that the parties at issue had entered into a consent agreement.

A recent example of the peculiarities of UK copyright law has brought into sharp relief how the length of some IP rights can outlive changes in statute and policy.

Since the beginning of this year following law n° 20104‐315 of March 11 2014 reinforcing the battle against counterfeiting, an article was introduced in the Intellectual Property Code regulating the IP profession stipulating that all qualified patent and trade mark attorneys (conseils en propriété industrielle) need to dedicate a significant part of their time to professional training.

According to Article 49.2 of the Trade Mark Act, in a trade mark dispute, such as an opposition, invalidation or non-use cancellation action, the IP Office is required to serve a copy of the brief/counterstatement filed by each party on the other party for a response. Under such procedure, the parties can alternately submit observations. It is only when the procedure comes to an end that the IP Office will start examining the case and render a decision.

Among Portuguese-speaking countries in Africa, one of the recent events regarding IP which deserves to be highlighted is the approval, in Mozambique, of the new Industrial Property Code (IPC) by Decree number 47/2015, published in the Boletim da República (Official Gazette) of December 31 2015, which comes into effect 90 days after its publication.

In 2012, Michael Dewayne Brown, an American citizen, sued for copyright infringement American English Skills Development Center (AESDCI) and its shareholders Armilyn MorilloBujis, et al, for their unauthorised copying, use, reproduction and obtaining copyright registration in the name of AESDCI, of his work "Conversational English Study Guide (First Edition)", of which Brown claimed to be the creator and author.

According to the Mexican Industrial Property Law (IPL) the following types of pharmaceutical-related claims are exceptions to patentability: