Archives for: ‘Kim O’Connell’
Last year was was a pretty grim year for economic activity. However, while intellectual property did not avoid the effects, a recent report from the the World International Property Organisation (“WIPO”) provided some interesting findings. The number of international patent filings dropped, probably not unexpectedly, by 4.5% in 2009, with countries such as the US and Germany experiencing significant declines of over 11%. However, it appears that not all countries were negatively affected, with applications in China increasing by 29.7% during 2009.
The High Court has refused to grant special leave from a decision of the Full Federal Court (H Lundbeck A/S v Alphapharm Pty Ltd  FCAFC 70) concerning a patent for the (+)-enantiomer of citalopram, known as escitalopram.
In an update to our earlier post, the High Court has refused an application by Dura-Post for special leave to appeal from a decision of the Full Federal Court.
Australian Life Scientist has recently published a feature article on the “Top 10 clinical trial mistakes”. The article, which addresses some of the common mistakes made when drafting clinical trial agreements, is a reminder of the need for such agreements not only to deal with the existing intellectual property rights of all participants but also with the generation of intellectual property by part
Yesterday, the US Supreme Court heard oral arguments from both sides in Bilski v Kappos over whether American law should permit patents for business methods.
The Federal Court recently confirmed, in Apotex v Les Laboratoires Servier (No 2), that a patentee’s conduct is a crucial element considered by the Court in relation to the exercise of judicial discretion to amend a patent. In particular, a patentee applying for an amendment must make a full and frank disclosure of all the reasons for seeking the amendment. The amendment must be sought in good faith and without delay.
A report prepared by an advisory committee to the Secretary of Health & Human Services in the United States has recommended that US patent law should be amended to create an exemption from liability for persons who infringe patents for genetic testing technologies. The committee’s recommendations arise from concerns over patient access to genetic tests and the restrictive licensing arrangements between patentees and licensees to administer and exploit the genetic testing technology.
On Friday the Full Federal Court overturned the decision by Ryan J in Wake Forest University Health Sciences v Smith and Nephew Pty Ltd to grant an injunction restraining Smith & Nephew from commercialising its negative pressure wound therapy product.
The joint judgment of Finn, Bennett and Middleton JJ is interesting for two reasons.
The European antitrust watchdog this week conducted surprise raids of the French offices of several major generic pharmaceutical companies as part of a growing investigation into suspected anti competitive practices in the European pharmaceutical market.