Remove Article Remove Litigation Remove Patent Remove Patent Application
article thumbnail

…And The Covaxin Patent Saga Continues: BBIL Changes the Patent Application Again

SpicyIP

The Story Till Now On one hand, COVID-19 cases are rising yet again to everyone’s surprise, and on the other, the surprises from the Covaxin patent application don’t seem to stop. BBIL then did a quick about-face on this application and issued a clarification on June 22 that they would be refiling with proper credits to ICMR.

article thumbnail

How the UPC and European Patents with Unitary Effect Reach Beyond Europe to the United States

IP Watchdog

The impact of the long-awaited launch of the Unified Patent Court (UPC) is hard to overstate. While litigators and patent portfolio managers are immediately feeling the impact in Europe, surprisingly, they should also expect an impact on information disclosure statement (IDS) strategy for U.S. patent applications.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

article thumbnail

CAFC Says USPTO Arguments for Rejecting Google Patent Application Lack Support in Record

IP Watchdog

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC) in a precedential decision today vacated a Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) finding that certain claims of Google, LLC’s U.S. Patent Application No. 14/628,093 were obvious. The CAFC opinion, authored by Chief Judge Moore, said the U.S.

article thumbnail

Fixing Double Patenting: The Procrustean Solution?

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch I recently provided a set of interesting data on the large number of patents that are “at risk” of being invalidated based on the Federal Circuit’s Cellect decision. The article takes a critical look at the practice of obviousness-type double patenting in the U.S. patent system.

Patent 106
article thumbnail

The Extent of Claim Amendment Allowed in a Patent Application: Part 1

SpicyIP

We’re pleased to bring to our readers a 2 part post by Amit Tailor on the recent case Nippon A&L vs The Controller of Patents, which looked into questions of how and to what extent a claim in a patent application can be amended under the Patents Act. vs. THE CONTROLLER OF PATENTS [ C.A.(COMM.IPD-PAT)

article thumbnail

Can amending the description to summarize the prior art add matter to the patent application as filed? (T 0471/20)

The IPKat

The EPO Guidelines for Examination require the description of a patent application to summarise the background art ( F-II-4.3 ). The patent as granted ( EP2657138 ) related to a food product handling system (e.g. D8 is a patent relating to a filing unit. The patent was thus revoked in its entirety. Not a robot?

Art 111
article thumbnail

Keeping up with Belgian patent litigation: Year case law review 2021

The IPKat

The winds of a busy Belgian court term blows through the IPKat's wild ancestor's mane (c) Christopher Stothers 'Tis the season for a look at the cases that were in 2021 from around Europe and what they mean for the IP litigation themes in those jurisdictions now that the dust has settled in 2022. A new prohibition on double patenting?