The IPKat

MAY 15, 2023

Striking the middle ground In T 0042/19 , the patent in question ( EP2846857 ) related to an injection device. The Opponent submitted evidence of alleged prior use in the form of the insulin injection pen ( GensuPen ). The Board of Appeal thus found no reasons to overrule the finding of the OD.

Confidentiality 129

Confidentiality Law Public Use Invention 129

The IPKat

DECEMBER 22, 2023

PatKat reviewing the year It is time once more for the IPKat patent year in review! Another source of confusion is the divergent approaches of the UK courts and the EPO with respect to the test for the evidence standard in sufficiency and inventive step analysis. Food for thought.

Invention 108

Invention Inventor Patent Law 108

The IP Law Blog

FEBRUARY 16, 2023

This month the Federal Circuit decided a case involving whether the display of a flowering plant constitutes an invalidating prior public use. Wingen LLC (“Wingen”) applied for a reissue of its utility patent for a Calibrachoa plant, called Cherry Star, which is similar to a petunia. But in that prior case, Delano Farms Co.

Public Use 98

Public Use Patent Invention Confidentiality 98

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

FEBRUARY 4, 2021

None of these was the first biosimilar for its respective reference product. Note that FDA still has not designated any biosimilar as interchangeable to its reference product. FDA has approved 29 biosimilars corresponding to nine different reference products. Reference Product. Reference Product. Biosimilar Drug.

Litigation 52

Litigation Settlement Marketing Marketing 52

Patently-O

JANUARY 21, 2023

Identify any specific sources of prior art not currently available through the Patents End-to-End Search system that you believe examiners should be searching. How should the USPTO facilitate an applicant’s submission of prior art that is not accessible in the Patents End-to-End Search system ( e.g., “on sale” or prior public use)?

Patent 93

Patent Invention Patent Prosecution Art 93

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 16, 2023

This month the Federal Circuit decided a case involving whether the display of a flowering plant constitutes an invalidating prior public use. Wingen LLC (“Wingen”) applied for a reissue of its utility patent for a Calibrachoa plant, called Cherry Star, which is similar to a petunia. § 161.

Public Use 52

Public Use Patent Invention Confidentiality 52

SpicyIP

AUGUST 15, 2021

The injunction was sought with respect to FMC’s patents relating to Chlorantraniliprole (‘CTPR’), a product used for making insecticides. This injunction plea came about as the defendant sought to launch a CTPR product which according to FMC would infringe its patents. Both these patents expire in August 2022.

Invention 52

Invention Patent Publishing Patent Infringement 52

Patently-O

SEPTEMBER 9, 2021

As is usual these days, ELCO turned-around and filed an inter partes review petition — challenging the patent’s validity based upon a 2011 product catalog (printed publication) that had featured the Hatteras lighting product. The court has denied DMF’s mandamus petition on an interesting post-IPR estoppel question.

Invention 76

Invention Art Litigation Public Use 76

LexBlog IP

FEBRUARY 14, 2023

Utility patents are for functional inventions. Design patents protect the look of something functional, regardless of whether the functional aspects are new. Because of this, a popular use of design patents is to protect the outside of common consumer products. What’s more common than the written word?

Design Patent 52

Design Patent Designs Design Patent 52

Kashishipr

NOVEMBER 10, 2021

A compulsory license is an authorization provided by a national authority to an individual without seeking the consent of the titleholder but after payment of royalties/compensation for the exploitation of the subject matter protected by the law on patents or other IPRs.

Licensing 105

Licensing Invention Intellectual Property Marketing 105

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 5, 2022

And, it goes like this–the relevant concept in the United States is that a person shall “ no[t] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” 14 Landslide 30 (No. Wright , 94 U.S. ”); James v. 2d 480 (Fed.

Intellectual Property 52

Intellectual Property Government Invention Copyright 52