Showing 7861 - 7870 of 7915 for "Patent" with applied filters
Filters:
31 August 2018 by Managing Intellectual Property
The decision of the Full Federal Court in GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) Consumer Healthcare Investments (Ireland) (No 2) Limited v Generic Partners Pty Limited (2018) FCAFC 71 (May 10 2018) indicates that a mistake in a claim cannot be ignored even where the skilled person understands that a mistake has been made.
08 August 2018 by Lucy Songi
In the latest Managing IP Women in IP Interview series, Lucy Songi interviewed Astrid Gérard (Preu Bohlig & Partners), Sandra Pohlman (df-mp), Christine Kanz (Hoyng Rokh Monegier) and Cordula Schumacher (Arnold Ruess) about initiatives in Germany to address gender inequality at the workplace
02 July 2018 by Takanori Abe
Shionogi is the owner of a patent entitled Pyrimidine Derivatives (JP2648897). X filed a request for a trial for invalidation of the patent. Nippon Chemiphar intervened in the trial as a plaintiff, and AstraZeneca UK intervened in the trial in order to support the defendant.
02 July 2018 by Managing Intellectual Property
Taiwan’s Council of Grand Justices issued Interpretation No 761 on February 9 2018, addressing the issue of whether or not judges and technical examiners at the Intellectual Property Court (hereinafter referred to as IP Court) are obliged to abide by Article 19.3 of the law on administrative litigation.
On June 1 2018, the Supreme People’s Court of China (SPC) issued Provisions on Several Issues in Adjudicating Patent Granting and Affirming Administrative Cases I (the Draft Provisions). The general public can submit its opinions and comments by July 1 2018.
The general limitation period for juridical actions in Austria is 30 years. However, particular laws can stipulate shorter or longer limitation periods.
CRISPR technology enables genes to be edited and can eventually treat diseases caused by gene mutations.
Following last year’s decision in Novartis (Singapore) Pte Ltd v Bristol-Myers Squibb Pharma Co [2017] SGHC 322, the Intellectual Property Office of Singapore (IPOS) has recently provided clarification on the provisions of the Singapore Patents Act and the Singapore Patents Rules regarding the correction of errors in filed patent applications.
02 July 2018 by Sybille Pfender
At the end of April 2018, Advocate General (AG) Wathelet handed down an advisory opinion regarding the first of three recent referrals to the CJEU (C-121/17). This concerns the interpretation of Article 3(a) of Regulation (EC) No 469/2009.
In a recent ruling by the Court of The Hague (ECLI:NL:RBDHA:2018:4591) a defendant/patentee has been ordered to pay the costs of nullity proceedings brought against it, despite not wishing to maintain or assert its patent.
