This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) states, ” a trademark protects brand names and logos used on goods and services. A patent protects an invention. For example, if you invent a new kind of vacuum cleaner, you would apply for a patent to protect the invention itself.” then it is no longer a trade secret.
Salus Pharmaceuticals And Another on 27 November 2024 (Himachal Pradesh HC) The suit was filed by the plaintiff for an ex parte ad interim injunction against the defendant alleging patentinfringement. The Court held that in the case of a medicine that claims to cure a disease, the test of efficacy can only be therapeutic efficacy.
Where it is a public sector entity, like a government initiative or a university, there is often the pressure of publishing and disseminating information at the earliest; whereas the private sector is usually free of such challenges, and major consideration is laid on the nature and value of the researched object or invention.
In matters of trade, Trademark, copyright and Patent act as building blocks of protection measures while conferring exclusive right over goods/services for the holder. Amazon often face patent violations with its increasing customer base and involvement of third-party seller. Patentinfringement can occur in both of these roles.
This high-profile case revolves around allegations of patentinfringement concerning two patents (“Suit Patents”), both relating to ‘Pertuzumab,’ a monoclonal antibody (Mab) biologic used in inhibiting tumor growth.
Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) states, ” a trademark protects brand names and logos used on goods and services. A patent protects an invention. For example, if you invent a new kind of vacuum cleaner, you would apply for a patent to protect the invention itself.”
Readers will recall that this Ibrutinib patent controversy started in 2020 when the Opposition Board rejected patent no. IN262968, covering Ibrutinib , on the basis of Laurus’ post-grant opposition due to a lack of inventive step. In an appeal, the IPAB set aside the impugned rejection and restored the above patent.
This has allowed parties with political, ideological, and other non-technical opposition to patent applications to unduly delay the process by raising a series of pre-grant challenges.”From A failure to disclose these foreign reports can also lead to trouble for the patentee later during patentinfringement proceedings.
A number of district courts, as well as the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, have weighed in on whether and to what extent a patent challenger in an inter partes review (IPR) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may be estopped from making prior art based challenges in a district court litigation.
On September 16, 2011, President Obama signed the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“AIA”). Among the changes created by the AIA, a new system was put into place for the submission of prior art to the Patent Office prior to patent issuance. Effective September 16, 2012, a third-party may submit prior art to the Patent Office.
A number of district courts, as well as the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, have weighed in on whether and to what extent a patent challenger in an inter partes review (IPR) before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board may be estopped from making prior art based challenges in a district court litigation.
Zydus Lifesciences Limited, on 13 March 2024 (Delhi High Court ) The case centered on the establishment of a confidentiality club in a biosimilar litigation dispute. It viewed the application as a proactive measure to facilitate a swift decision, ensuring that the confidentiality club could promptly access relevant information when needed.
Highlights of the Week Hot-Tubbing in Indian IP Litigation: Delhi High Court Issues Directives in High-Stakes PatentInfringement Case Image from [link] here Recently, the DHC issued directives regarding expert evidence in the Perjeta patent litigation. Anything we are missing out on? Please let us know in the comments below.
vs Controller Of Patents on 8 December, 2023 (Delhi High Court) Emerson’s appeals under Section 117A of the Patents Act, 1970, contest the rejection of patent applications (Nos. 1253/DEL/2006 and 4197/DEL/2015) related to computer software based on earlier guidelines of the patent office.
This decision indicates that an SEP owner sometimes might need to provide information to a prospective licensee (under a confidentiality agreement), although that may not be necessary for an experienced licensee who can consult existing patent licenses they have entered with others. non-discriminatory] part of FRAND).
(Over) Expanding the Circle: DHC Allows In-house Employees to Access Confidential Documents in InterDigital v. Oppo Recently, the DHC in InterDigital v Oppo set a rather intriguing precedent by allowing access to in-house employees to the confidentiality club documents. Case Summaries Mankind Pharma Limited v.
Nirtech – Analysing the Claim of Breach of Confidential Information Image from here. Ex-employees using confidential information acquired from the former employer! Nirtech on protecting confidential information. US Supreme Court rejects computer scientist’s lawsuit over AI-generated inventions. Other posts Rochem v.
IP includes any creation of the mind, including inventions, literary and artistic works, symbols, names, images, and designs, and various forms of IP protection cover these different categories. Patent Prosecution, Portfolio, and Strategic Patenting Considerations.
Patentinfringement. PatentInfringement. Both patentinfringement cases (-2258, -2899) remain ongoing. The parties’ stay carved out a dispute related to the protective order and limited use of Bioepis’s confidential information for a Danish proceeding. ( Patent Nos. adalimumab). adalimumab).
In the case of sports, patents help to protect inventions such as sports equipment, training technologies, and gaming hardware. A perfect example of this is LED Stumps Invented by Bronte Eckermann. Patents incentivize innovation by granting inventors exclusive rights to their creations.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 9,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content