Remove topics ambiguous
article thumbnail

Announcing the Winners of the 2nd Shamnad Basheer Essay Competition on IP Law!

SpicyIP

Like last year, we kept the topic selection open to participants – asking them to choose any topic they wanted so long as it related to IP. Nonetheless, we were glad to see entries across a range of interesting topics and are very happy to see relatively uncommon topics take the podium places. The essay is available here.

Law 137
article thumbnail

Only Humans are Inventive?

Patently-O

In its newest decision on the topic, the Federal Circuit declares instead, for the purposes of patent law, an inventor must be human. Here, there is no ambiguity: the Patent Act requires that inventors must be natural persons; that is, human beings. . § 100(f) (2022). Vidal, 2021-2347, 2022 WL 3130863 (Fed.

Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Trending Sources

article thumbnail

U Mass v L’Oréal: Avoiding indefiniteness through claim construction

Patently-O

UMass’s claimed invention is a topical skin care product containing adenosine that is applied to the skin. Panel: Prost, Mayer, Taranto (author). This opinion nominally addressing indefiniteness illustrates the power of de novo claim construction review at the Federal Circuit. ” Slip Op.

article thumbnail

Book Review: Research Handbook on IP and Moral Rights

The IPKat

The topics vary. Another example is the chapter by Christophe Geiger and Elena Izyumenko on the topic of compliance with freedom of expression and moral rights. They focus on the unharmonized status of moral rights in the EU, and the ambiguities surrounding the availability of traditional copyright exceptions in this context.

article thumbnail

Predicting Eligibility

Patently-O

Rob Merges on the topic. The framework provided a key procedural process and hundreds of decisions gave the opportunity to work through ambiguities. by Dennis Crouch I have really enjoyed reading the new article by Professors Rantanen and Datzov providing empirical evidence that eligibility outcomes are now quite predictable.

article thumbnail

Changes in the draft 2022 EPO Guidelines for Examination on description amendments: Substantial changes or window-dressing?

The IPKat

Given that the monopoly of a patent is defined by the claims (and that the description need only be referred to if there is ambiguity in the claims), then amending the description in line with the claims seems superfluous to requirements. After all, other jurisdictions don't find description amendments necessary.

article thumbnail

"Australia's #1" is puffery for product sourced from but not sold in Australia

43(B)log

1 Joint & Muscle Spray and Cream Topical Pain Relief Brand” on: (1) its Australian website; (2) social media; and (3) Ultimate Fighting Championship (“UFC”) athletes’ clothing in matches televised in the United States. MaxRelief used to surce pain relief spray products in Australia from a non-party, but stopped in 2014.