-
LexBlog Australia › Patentology
54 results for LexBlog Australia › Patentology
-
Why Do Applicants File Divisional Applications, and Are They as Important as ‘Original’ Applications?
In its 2020 IP Report, IP Australia introduced a novel measure of patent application filing intensity to identify top applicants – namely, the number of ‘original’ applications filed, excluding any divisional applications. For the uninitiated, divisional applications are patent applications that are based on subject matter that is ‘divided out’ from previously filed applications (typically...
-
How Up-to-Date is IP Australia’s AusPat Data?
One of the great resources provided by IP Australia is its AusPat online patent data service. AusPat enables users to search for Australian patents and applications using a range of options and search fields, view numerous data items for each application, and access most incoming and outgoing correspondence via eDossier. In my view, it is...
-
While One IPH Firm Sues Former Partners, 20% of Patent Attorneys Jump Ship from Another
On 14 December 2020, Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – a firm in the stable owned by listed company IPH Limited (ASX:IPH) – filed suit in the Federal Court of Australia against former Pizzeys principals William Bennett and Martin Richardson, along with the new firm they have established, RnB IP (collectively ‘RnB’). The lawsuit...
-
DABUS Down Under – Can an AI ‘Communicate’ an Invention to a Human Applicant?
Back in September I reported that an application naming an ‘artificial intelligence’ going by the name DABUS (‘Device for the Autonomous Bootstrapping of Unified Sentience’) as inventor had been filed in Australia. The application – no. 2019363177 – was derived from an international application filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), and names Dr Stephen...
-
COVID Update – October Filings Down, as Pandemic Pain not Shared Equally Among Attorney Firms
Last month I reported that, against the trend of 2020, September was a busy month for Australian patent filings, with standard applications up by 8.1% on the same month in 2019. (In fact, following more recent additions and corrections in IP Australia’s records, the increase is even higher, at 9.2%.) But, sadly, any optimism this...
-
Australian High Court Finds that Sale of a Patented Product Exhausts Patentee’s Rights
In a significant judgment, the High Court of Australia has changed an aspect of patent law in Australia, ruling by a 4-3 majority that the first sale of a patented product exhausts the patentee’s exclusive rights in that product: Calidad Pty Ltd v Seiko Epson Corporation [2020] HCA 41. For over a century, an alternative...
-
Games — Now Less Patentable than Ever in Australia
In a recent decision, a Hearing Officer within the Australian Patent Office rejected Australian patent application no. 2018219972, in the name of casino operator Crown Melbourne Ltd, relating to a modified roulette table layout. In particular, the claimed invention was designed to provide a ‘double zero’ roulette game having similar visual appearance and betting options...
-
COVID Update – Surprise Surge in September Patent Filings
Defying the trend of almost every prior month this year, Australian standard patent filings in September were up by 8.1% on the same period in 2019. This is the largest positive change for any month in 2020, beating pre-COVID January during which standard applications bested the previous year by 7.7%. The September surge was driven...
-
Has COVID-19 Affected Patent, Trade Mark or Design Filing Activity – an Australian Perspective
This is a guest contribution from Mike Lloyd of Patent-Insights. Further details about the author can be found at the end of the article. COVID-19 has had many devastating impacts all around the world, both in terms of fatalities and other health impacts, and also in economic terms. While the economic impact is yet to...
-
Beware Unregistered Patent Practitioners!
The title of this article is intentionally ambiguous. Does it mean that prospective clients should beware of unregistered practitioners? Or does it mean that unregistered practitioners should beware of getting caught out? Ideally, it would mean both. In practice, as things currently stand in Australia, it mostly means neither. Unregistered practitioners are not a problem...
-
Actions Trump Intentions in Determining Infringement of ‘Swiss’ Claims in Australia
In what might well be the final word on the scope and effect of so-called ‘Swiss type’ claims in Australia – at least for the foreseeable future – an enlarged panel of five judges of the Federal Court has clarified what is required for infringement of this form of claim: Mylan Health Pty Ltd v...
-
Costs Award Discounted for ‘Over-Egged’ Evidence in Aristocrat Case
In a postscript to last month’s decision in Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Limited v Commissioner of Patents [2020] FCA 778 (see Federal Court Finds Computer-Implemented Gaming Machine Patent-Eligible in Australia), the court has now ruled that the Commissioner of Patents should pay only 50% of Aristocrat’s costs associated with its expert evidence. Under the usual...
-
How Many Patents Are There?
A question that I see asked from time-to-time is: ‘how many granted, enforceable patents actually exist?’ The answer obviously changes almost every day, as old patents cease or expire, and new patents are granted. That being said, as of 6 July 2020 there were, according to IP Australia’s records, 160,822 standard patents in force in...
-
Federal Court Finds Computer-Implemented Gaming Machine Patent-Eligible in Australia
On appeal from a decision of a delegate of the Commissioner of Patents, a single judge (Justice Burley) of the Federal Court of Australia has found that the claims of a number of innovation patents owned by Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd, directed to electronic gaming machines (EGMs), are directed to patent-eligible subject matter: Aristocrat...
-
Rokt’s Computerised ‘Marketing Scheme’ Fails Patent-Eligibility Test on Appeal
Following an appeal by the Commissioner of Patents, a Full Bench of the Federal Court of Australia has overturned a decision of a single judge of the Court relating to the patent-eligibility of a computer-implemented invention. The Full Court has ruled that a claimed method and system, developed by Singapore-based Rokt Pte Ltd, for providing...
-
The 2020 Australian IP Report: Revisited
Last month, I wrote about IP Australia’s release of the Australian Intellectual Property Report 2020 (‘IP Report’). I focused in particular on data included in the ‘Patents’ section of the report, and raised some questions about the methodology and the accuracy of some of the results presented. I am pleased to say that IP Australia...
-
Annual Australian IP Report Spins 2019 Patent Filing Numbers by Devaluing Divisionals
Last week, IP Australia released the Australian Intellectual Property Report 2020 (‘IP Report’). As has become customary over the past few years, the launch of the IP Report was timed to coincide with World IP Day, which fell on Sunday 26 April 2020. As my own analysis, published back in January, indicated, the number of...
-
IP Australia is Providing Free, Streamlined Extensions of Time for Parties Impacted by COVID-19
IP Australia has announced that, as of 22 April 2020 up until at least 31 May 2020, most deadlines associated with Australian patent, trade marks, and design rights – including evidence deadlines in opposition matters – can be extended by up to three months, at no charge, if the extension is required ‘due to the...
-
Why it is Unlikely that the Australian Government Will Invoke Crown Use Provisions in COVID-19 Crisis
On 19 March 2020, Australia’s Shadow Minister for Employment, Industry, Science and Small Business, Brendan O’Connor, wrote to his counterpart, Industry Minister Karen Andrews, to ask if the government had ‘explored how Crown use of patents may be invoked, particularly for urgent manufacturing of supplies such as facial masks’. While the country’s response to the...
-
Countdown to the End of the Innovation Patent: Abolition Legislation Signed into Law
On 26 February 2020, the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 2 and Other Measures) Bill 2019 received Royal Assent (i.e. was signed into law by the Governor General of Australia), becoming Act No. 9 of 2020. I reported passing of this Bill in the Senate, with amendments, in November last year, noting...
-
IP Australia Proposes Minor Fee Changes, Major Changes to Opposition and Other Hearing Costs Awards
Just prior to Christmas, IP Australia announced that it is seeking feedback on its draft Cost Recovery Implementation Statement (CRIS), which outlines proposed fee changes that would take effect from October 2020. It is also taking the opportunity to review the hearing costs that may be awarded for Patents, Trade Marks and Designs. The public...
-
Interactive Maps II: Where do Leading Patent Attorney Firms Find New Clients?
In my previous blog post, I explained how preparing articles looking at patent applicants, patent recipients, and attorney firm performance over calendar year 2019 had got me thinking about where ‘new’ Australian patent applicants come from, in the literal sense of where they are located geographically? I also noted that IP Australia’s annual IP Government Open...
-
Winners & Losers in Patent Filings – Why 2019 Was a Bad Year for Many Major Attorney Firms, and for Australia
In my previous article, I looked at the top applicants for Australian patents in 2019. In this article, I turn the spotlight on the Australian patent attorney firms that were responsible for handling many of those filings. Having identified a 1% decline overall in standard patent filings, a nearly 20% decline in innovation patent filings,...
-
Chinese Mobile Tech Company OPPO Comes from Nowhere to Top Australian Patent Filing Table for 2019
Last calendar year, the number of standard patent filings in Australia fell by 1%, from 29,957 in 2018 to 29,666 in 2019. While this represents only a small decline, it follows two years of growth, by 1.8% for 2016-2017 and 3.6% for 2017-2018, and thus represents a reversal of the recent upwards trend. While international...
-
Abstract Ideas and ‘Software Patents’ – Two Sides to the Story
I recently wrote about the decision of the Federal Court of Australia in Repipe Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents[2019] FCA 1956, in which two innovation patents owned by RePipe were found to be invalid, and thus liable to be revoked, on the ground that neither was for a patent-eligible ‘manner of manufacture’ under Australian...
-
Transformation of the Australian Patent Attorney Profession Turns Ugly with Firms Fighting in Federal Court
A dispute between the firm of Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys – owned by listed entity IPH Limited (ASX:IPH) – and a firm established by two former Pizzeys principals, has gained public exposure through a decision of Justice Jagot in the Federal Court of Australia: Pizzeys Patent and Trade Mark Attorneys Pty Limited v...
-
Repipe Rebuffed in Appeal Against Rejection of Patent on Computer-Implemented Invention for Workplace Safety
In a decision issued on 22 November 2019 (Repipe Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents[2019] FCA 1956), Justice McKerracher in the Federal Court of Australia has found two innovation patents owned by RePipe Pty Ltd to be invalid, and thus liable to be revoked, on the ground that neither was for a patent-eligible ‘manner of...
-
Australian Senate Condemns the Innovation Patent, but Grants an Extra Six Months on Death Row
On 16 October 2019 the Intellectual Property Laws Amendment (Productivity Commission Response Part 2 and Other Measures) Bill 2019 was passed by the Australian Senate. Among other purposes, this bill includes long-anticipated provisions to phase out Australia’s second-tier patent right, the innovation patent – despite concerted last-ditch efforts by opponents of the move to persuade...
-
Australia’s ‘Generic’ Implementation of an Abstract Idea is not Patentable, but Does Prior Art have Anything to Do with It?
On Friday the 13th of September 2019, an expanded five judge panel of the Full Bench of the Federal Court of Australia handed down its much-anticipated judgment in the appeal by Encompass Corporation Pty Ltd against the finding of a single judge that its computer-implemented method for displaying information gathered from multiple sources was ineligible...
-
The Patent Office is Granting Time Extensions to Australia’s Grace Period for Filing After Self-Disclosure
The Australian patent law and regulations provide applicants with a 12-month ‘grace period’, enabling an application to be validly filed following an inadvertent, or intentional, act of self-disclosure of an invention. As most readers will doubtless be aware, this is significant because in the absence of such provisions, any disclosure – such as publication or...