On 15 April 2013, the Intellectual Property Legislation Amendment (Raising the Bar) Regulation 2013 (No 1) commenced with much fanfare. The RTB regulations made significant changes in relation to patent oppositions, principally with the aim of resolving proceedings faster. The reforms recognised that under the previous regime, opposition proceedings often took several (and sometimes many) …
>> Read more
The Albanese Government’s 2023-24 Budget handed down last night provided a funding boost for startups as part of the Government’s push to invest in key strategic industries. Treasurer Dr Jim Chalmers, recognising Australia’s opportunity for growth and prosperity in the global shift to clean energy, announced a new $392.4 million Industry Growth Program (a better …
>> Read more
The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 made two changes to the inventive step test in Australia. The first was to remove the geographical limitation to the scope of common general knowledge. The second was to remove the requirement that a prior art document be one that would have been “ascertained, understood and …
>> Read more
Some of the most significant changes to the requirements for a valid patent brought about by the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 have been in the area of support and disclosure. A key rationale for the grant of patent rights has always been that in return for a limited monopoly, the …
>> Read more
Continuing our deep dive into the influence of the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012, we now look at the changes made to Provisional Applications and the conflicting result that the Act had on a system originally aimed at saving time and cost to applicants. Before filing a complete patent application, an …
>> Read more
The Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Raising the Bar) Act 2012 was intended to address six key areas, one of which was to raise the quality of granted patents. The aim of raising patent quality was to ensure that patents granted in Australia were more closely aligned with international standards and with those granted by our …
>> Read more
Some may remember a time when business methods were patentable subject matter, and at first glance it seems that the increasingly popular AI, ChatGPT, would like us to return to these halcyon days. When pushed, however, ChatGPT does recommend that you seek the professional advice of a patent attorney. ChatGPT is a chatbot developed by …
>> Read more
Keen cyclists may be aware of a two-year patent stoush between bicycle component manufacturers SRAM and Princeton Carbon Works (PCW). Following a two-week trial, a Miami Jury has found that a carbon fibre bicycle wheel produced by PCW did not infringe two of SRAM’s US Patents. The SRAM patents US 9,610,800 and US 10,611,188 relate …
>> Read more
It has been several years since the ‘new’ New Zealand Patents Act came into force and we are beginning to see how the practicalities of this regimen are playing out. The recent decision, Intelli Particle Pty Ltd (‘Intelli’)[1], illustrates some important aspects of contemporary New Zealand practice. Despite being the subject of a Global Patent …
>> Read more
The recent decision in Zoetis Services LLC v Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica GmbH [2022] APO 72 highlights the importance of strict adherence to procedural matters in patent oppositions. In Australian patent oppositions there is a strict procedure for the filing of evidence by the parties. The patent opponent firstly files evidence-in-support of the case as outlined in …
>> Read more
