Congratulations to our Managing Principal, Ross McFarlane, for being named as one IAM’s Global Leaders for 2023. This is a very significant achievement as being awarded this status as Global Leader requires attorneys to already be ranked in IAM Patent’s Gold Tier. Ross has also been a highly recommended individual in the IAM Patent 1000 …
>> Read more
The factual situation in Campaigntrack v Real Estate Tool Box is not an uncommon one. Wanting a better software program for its operations, a business enters into an arrangement with a software developer who has experience in that area to develop a new program with reference to a competitor program’s functionality. What was interesting and …
>> Read more
The Federal Court recently deliberated on a patent infringement and validity dispute between Global Tech Corporation Pty Ltd (Global Tech) and Reflex Instruments Asia Pacific Pty Ltd (Reflex). In arriving at its decision that infringement had occurred, the Court had to consider what technical field the patent belonged to, and then weigh up arguments around …
>> Read more
Venkat Thandra; Ahmed Farouk Shaaban [2022] APO 65 is yet another manner of manufacture decision in relation to computer related inventions by IP Australia. You can probably guess the outcome, but of note is the approach taken to Hearings at IP Australia where they emanate from an Examiner Objection as well as the time to …
>> Read more
While Australia does have a form of patent linkage, it is currently a limited system and in practice is not very useful for patentees. There is no patent listing system (equivalent to the US FDA’s Orange Book) in Australia. The current patent linkage system extends only to the requirements asked of companies when they apply …
>> Read more
The Full Court has unanimously dismissed the appeal in State of Escape Accessories v Schwartz, rejecting the claims against Stefanie Schwartz and Chuchka Pty Ltd for copyright infringement in respect of State of Escape’s well-known perforated neoprene tote bag (the Escape Bag) on the basis that it was not a “work of artistic craftsmanship” under …
>> Read more
The Federal Court has allowed an appeal in Enagic v Horizons on grounds including s 62A of the Trade Marks Act that the application subject to the opposition was filed in ‘bad faith’. The determination of this ground heavily turned not only on the evidence that was submitted, but also evidence that was not submitted …
>> Read more
The Full Court decision in Vehicle Monitoring Systems v SARB Management Group has given detailed consideration to the notion of “inventive concept” in the context of determining entitlement to an invention. The case relates to Australian Patent Application no. 2013213708 entitled “Vehicle Detection” in the name of SARB. which describes systems and methods for detecting …
>> Read more
The Federal Circuit Court decision in Whitsunday Aerial Solutions Professionals v Emprja has served as a reminder of three key things to remember when dealing with copyright works… Read more on page 10 of Inspire>>
Patent applicants and patentees may amend the claims of their patent specification to distinguish the invention from relevant prior art. The use of a disclaimer – if permissible under s 102 of the Patents Act – can be an effective strategy to limit the claim scope to the minimum extent necessary. Read more on page …
>> Read more
