We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.
Lexology logo






  Request new password

Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 10

US Court prevents replanting of progeny seed under the Patents Act, saving of progeny seed is permitted under the Plant Variety Protection Act

  • Watermark Patent & Trade Marks Attorneys
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • May 17 2013

The US Supreme Court has ruled unanimously that farmers cannot freely use patented genetically modified soybeans to harvest progeny seeds for

Patentability of computer software upheaval in US courts

  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • May 14 2013

The patentability of computer software is a hot topic in Australian courts at the moment. However, we aren't alone in struggling with this

Dispelling the Myriad gene patent harmonization myth

  • Foley & Lardner LLP
  • -
  • Australia, Canada, European Union, France, Germany, Japan, USA
  • -
  • April 30 2013

In the wake of the Supreme Court oral arguments in the Myriad "gene patent" case, most commentators are predicting that the Court will uphold the

Australian Federal Court upholds Myriad’s gene patent

  • Morrison & Foerster LLP
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • February 15 2013

While the question of patentability of isolated gene sequences awaits resolution at the U.S. Supreme Court, the Australian Federal Court today upheld

The Australian impact of the Apple v. Samsung decision

  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • September 7 2012

Hot on the heels of its own win against its competitor in Federal Court in California in late August, Apple on Monday filed fresh claims against Samsung for patent infringement in the USA, this time citing Korean company’s flagship smartphone, the Galaxy S III, as a device which Apple believes is in breach of its intellectual property rights

US and Australian computer implemented inventions

  • Freehills Patent Attorneys
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • August 14 2012

The question of whether computer implemented inventions are patentable subject matter is one that continues to defy a straight answer

European Commission ups the cost of paying for delay

  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • -
  • Australia, European Union, USA
  • -
  • August 13 2012

On 25 July 2012, the EC alleged that Danish pharmaceutical company Lundbeck violated EU antitrust rules by colluding to prevent other pharma companies from marketing generic versions of its best-seller antidepressant, citalopram

The importance of good laboratory notebook practice

  • Davies Collison Cave
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • October 18 2011

Take note: poor laboratory notebook documentation could cost you!

Competition regulators continue their campaign against pharmaceutical companies

  • King & Wood Mallesons
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • June 1 2011

Last month, the US Federal Trade Commission (FTC) released its findings on reverse payment settlements between pharmaceutical companies in the 2010 US fiscal year

Why the Bilski decision matters in Australia

  • Watermark Patent & Trade Marks Attorneys
  • -
  • Australia, USA
  • -
  • July 21 2010

In 2009 more than 2,200 patent applications were filed directly in the United States by Australian entities, while nearly 1,500 Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications designating the United States were filed by Australian entities

Current Search

Suggested Facets

Author

Firm Name

Jurisdiction

Workarea

© Copyright 2006-2013 Globe Business Publishing Ltd | Cookies | Disclaimer | Privacy policy