Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Gardens, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Search results for

There are 22,295 results that match your search.22,295 results
  • A new law related to service inventions (Law 83/2014) entered into force in Romania at the end of June 2014. In this context, it has become essential for the employer to have a full overview over the last two years of activity of its employee(s).
  • The US Supreme Court's unanimous June 19 ruling in Alice Corporation Pty, Ltd v CLS Bank International et al – that a computer-implemented method of reducing risk in financial transactions between two parties by employing a neutral intermediary is patent ineligible – is already affecting USPTO review of business method and software patents.
  • The Federal Circuit issued a precedential decision this summer in the case StonCor Group, Inc v Specialty Coatings, Inc regarding the proper pronunciation of a trade mark that is not a recognised word. This decision is instructional for trade mark disputes involving marks that are uniquely coined terms.
  • Infringement under the doctrine of equivalents was the main subject of a recent decision of the District Court of The Hague in Bayer Pharma v Sandoz. Bayer owns a European patent which claims a two-step method for the production of the contraceptive drospirenon. This two-step method includes oxidation with a ruthenium salt as catalyst.
  • Patent owners have been shocked at how popular IPR proceedings at the PTAB have proven. As the USPTO mulls over changes and the Federal Circuit braces itself for a deluge of appeals, Michael Loney reports on how the PTAB is likely to evolve
  • What happens when brands fail to secure the right music licences for their campaigns?
  • A recent rule change in Italy enables patents to be modified at any stage during litigation. Licia Garotti explains why it has been criticised, and sets out some strategies for patent owners
  • The Asean Patent Examination Cooperation Programme (ASPEC) commenced on June 15 2009, but it is only in the year 2014 that the Intellectual Property Office in the Philippines (IPOPHL) has begun accepting ASPEC request forms, after rules implementing the programme have been modified or amended. The participating ASEAN member states (AMS) are nine: Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, Indonesia, Lao PDR, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Thailand and Vietnam. The ASPEC is the first regional patent cooperation project among IP offices in the ASEAN to use the search and examination results from another participating AMS IP office as its reference in its own search and examination work.
  • On July 21 2014, the Vietnam government issued Decree 71/2014/ND-CP (Decree 71), which sets out the prescribed remedies for competition violations. These include sanctions in cases of antitrust, unfair dealings and unfair competition. While these measures are a step in the right direction, they potentially conflict with last year's Decree 99/2013/ND-CP on administrative sanctions in industrial property (Decree 99), complicating the enforcement of Decree 99.
  • In the Argentine Republic, the National Institute of Industrial Property (INPI) has responsibility to protect industrial property rights, either by conferring the title deeds set forth by the legislation on the matter, or by effecting the corresponding registrations for that purpose.