Clear all

Refine your search

Content type
Tags
Firm name
Author
Jurisdiction
Industry
Language

3,320 results found

Article
Ask Lexy

McDermott Will & Emery | USA | 28 Sep 2023

Chilly Adventures: Design Patent Prior Art Comparison Applies to Article of Manufacture

Addressing a matter of first impression concerning the scope of prior art relevant to a design patent infringement analysis, the US Court of Appeals…
Article
Ask Lexy

McDermott Will & Emery | USA | 20 Jul 2023

Hit a Nerve? Obviousness Inquiry Must Address Claims at Issue

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit vacated and remanded a Patent Trial & Appeal Board non-obviousness decision, finding that the context…
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Lee and Li Attorneys at Law | Taiwan | 3 Jul 2023

Are the criteria for determining "novelty" the same as the criteria for determining "fictitious novelty"?

It is generally understood that there are two main differences between novelty and fictitious novelty. A recent decision issued by the Intellectual Property and Commercial Court considered the criteria for determining fictitious novelty, exploring the legislative purpose and foreign legislative examples of the Patent Act.
Article
Ask Lexy

Studio Legale Previti | Italy | 1 Jun 2023

Intelligenza Artificiale: l’esame e le ricerche di anteriorità dei marchi di impresa

L’IA porterà vantaggi al procedimento di ricerca di anteriorità e all’esame di registrabilità di marchi di Impresa, contribuendo i) a diminuire i…
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Grau & Angulo | Spain | 24 Apr 2023

Barcelona court lifts ex parte preliminary injunction over dimethyl fumarate medicinal products

Barcelona Commercial Court No. 4 recently lifted the preliminary injunctions it had previously granted ex parte at the request of Biogen. The injunctions prohibited the launch onto the Spanish market of dimethyl fumarate generic medicinal products. The Court concluded that the patent at stake seemed prima facie invalid due to its lack of inventive step, based on the prior art filed by the......
Article
Ask Lexy

McDermott Will & Emery | USA | 20 Apr 2023

Overlapping Ranges in Prior Art Put Burden on Patentee to Show Criticality

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit found that the challenged patents were invalid as anticipated and obvious in a case involving claimed…
Article
Ask Lexy

McDermott Will & Emery | USA | 20 Apr 2023

If Prior Art Discloses Ingredients and How to Mix Them, the “Cake” Is Anticipated

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit affirmed that challenged claims were invalid as anticipated based on principles of inherency where…
Article
Ask Lexy

McDermott Will & Emery | USA | 23 Mar 2023

Prior Art Coherency and Cache Incoherency: “Known-Technique” Rationale for Motivation to Combine

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, addressing the issue of whether certain factual and legal conclusions relating to obviousness were…
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Westerberg & Partners Advokatbyrå AB | Sweden | 30 Jan 2023

Designer table enjoys protection as work of applied art

Cases concerning infringement of works of applied art have become something of a trend in Sweden. This case, between a high-end furniture designer and a national chain and regarding infringement of a dining table, exemplifies this trend and garnered significant media attention in 2022. The first-instance outcome confirms the current Swedish case law in the area, including the continued......
Commentary
Ask Lexy

Lee and Li Attorneys at Law | Taiwan | 23 Jan 2023

What are the most important features of a bicycle? Inconsistent court rulings in design patent infringement case

In a recent design patent infringement case involving electric bicycle and motorcycle designs, the opinions of the first-instance court, the second-instance court and the Supreme Court showed that the court's opinion on which features are considered to be "salient" has a decisive impact on the result of the judgment. This case shows that significant work remains to be done in order to......
Previous page 1 2 3 ...