Category Archive for: ‘Patents’

Computer implemented business methods – routine patent cases for the Australian courts?

A Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia appeared to suggest that patent cases involving claimed inventions for computer implemented business methods can be determined using an established framework and such cases are no longer at the cutting edge of patentability – that mantle has been assumed by gene technology. The case in point is Commissioner of Patents v …

Read More
Subjects:

Productivity Commission releases roadmap for IP review and calls for submissions

Last week, the Productivity Commission released the Issues Paper in accordance with its comprehensive review of Australia’s IP regime (Inquiry). In a previous post, we outlined the scope of the Inquiry and the key areas of the IP regime which the Federal Government had directed the Commission to examine and report on by August 2016. The Issues Paper sets out …

Read More
Partner:

The Trans-Pacific Partnership’s IP provisions: Biologics and biosimilars, copyright and privacy

The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) was concluded on 5 October 2015, after 8 years of negotiations. Its twelve signatories, who together account for 40% of world GDP, are Australia, Brunei, Canada, Chile, Japan, Malaysia, Mexico, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore, United States and Vietnam. The details of the agreement have yet to be released, but a number of drafts of the agreement …

Read More
Subjects: |

High Court re-invents the test for patentable subject matter and finds the patent for the isolated breast cancer gene invalid

The High Court has handed down a significant decision finding that patent claims for isolated gene sequences, indicative of a predisposition to breast cancer, are not patentable subject matter. The decision can be found here (a one page summary has also been published by the High Court). The decision overturns the unanimous decision of the Full Federal Court (which sat …

Read More
Subjects:
Partner:

High Court States the Obvious: AstraZeneca AB v Apotex Pty Ltd Appeal Decided

by Kim O’Connell, Suzy Madar and James Ellsmore In a widely anticipated decision, the High Court has upheld a decision of the Full Federal Court that AstraZeneca’s patent relating to low dosages of rosuvastatin is invalid for want of inventive step. Rosuvastatin is used in the treatment of high cholesterol and is marketed by AstraZeneca as Crestor. The decision will …

Read More
Subjects: |

Update: Otsuka Successful in Stay Application: Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd v Generic Health Pty Ltd [2015] FCA 848

Further to our post of 7 July 2015, the proceedings brought by Otsuka and Bristol Myers Squibb (the “exclusive licensee” of Otsuka’s patents for aripiprazole) against Generic Health have taken another turn. Justice Nicholas delivered judgment on Friday 14 August in the interlocutory application sought by Otsuka and BMS. The orders and reasons were published on Tuesday 18 August. The …

Read More
Subjects:
Partner:

Productivity Commission embarks on 12-month inquiry into Australia’s intellectual property regime

The Federal Government has given the green light to the Productivity Commission to undertake a comprehensive review of Australia’s IP regime (Inquiry).  The Commission must provide a report on the Inquiry by August 2016. The Inquiry was one of the three recommendations relating to IP in the Final Report of the Competition Policy Review (also known as the Harper Review), …

Read More
Partner:

Too early to pull the plug on innovation patents

In June 2014, following three years of public consultation, the Advisory Council on Intellectual Property (ACIP) released a report in which it made recommendations to reform the Innovation Patent System. ACIP did not, at that stage, recommend abolishing the system. Our previous post on ACIP’s recommendations can be found here. On 25 May 2015, IP Australia published a report entitled …

Read More
Subjects:
Partner:

Spins a web, anytime, but only pays royalties until the expiry of the patent

It a recent US Supreme Court case involving a patent for a device shooting Spiderman foam ‘webs’ from wrists, Justice Kagan did a (Marvel-ous?) summation of the issue at hand: ‘Patents endow their holders with certain superpowers, but only for a limited time’.

Read More
Subjects:
Partner:

Page 4 of 29« First...«23456»1020...Last »