SpicyIP

MARCH 7, 2024

This high-profile case revolves around allegations of patent infringement concerning two patents (“Suit Patents”), both relating to ‘Pertuzumab,’ a monoclonal antibody (Mab) biologic used in inhibiting tumor growth. For example in Australian law, Rule 23.15

Patent Infringement 59

Patent Infringement Litigation IP Intellectual Property 59

The IP Law Blog

JANUARY 18, 2024

Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) states, ” a trademark protects brand names and logos used on goods and services. A patent protects an invention. For example, if you invent a new kind of vacuum cleaner, you would apply for a patent to protect the invention itself.” then it is no longer a trade secret.

Confidentiality 113

Confidentiality Invention Business Artistic Work 113

LexBlog IP

JANUARY 18, 2024

Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”) states, ” a trademark protects brand names and logos used on goods and services. A patent protects an invention. For example, if you invent a new kind of vacuum cleaner, you would apply for a patent to protect the invention itself.”

Confidentiality 52

Confidentiality Invention Business Artistic Work 52

SpicyIP

JANUARY 23, 2024

Readers will recall that this Ibrutinib patent controversy started in 2020 when the Opposition Board rejected patent no. IN262968, covering Ibrutinib , on the basis of Laurus’ post-grant opposition due to a lack of inventive step. In an appeal, the IPAB set aside the impugned rejection and restored the above patent.

Intellectual Property 129

Intellectual Property Patent Blogging Marketing 129

SpicyIP

MARCH 11, 2024

Highlights of the Week Hot-Tubbing in Indian IP Litigation: Delhi High Court Issues Directives in High-Stakes Patent Infringement Case Image from [link] here Recently, the DHC issued directives regarding expert evidence in the Perjeta patent litigation. Anything we are missing out on? Please let us know in the comments below.

Trademark 59

Trademark Registration Copyright Patent 59

SpicyIP

MARCH 25, 2024

.” The Defendants’ adoption of this mark, resembling the Plaintiffs’ trademark in font, style, and overall appearance, was alleged to mislead consumers and infringe upon the Plaintiffs’ rights. The court, upon examining the evidence presented, found a prima facie case in favor of the Plaintiffs.

Trademark 52

Trademark Patent Copyright Confidentiality 52

SpicyIP

APRIL 30, 2023

Nirtech – Analysing the Claim of Breach of Confidential Information Image from here. Ex-employees using confidential information acquired from the former employer! Nirtech on protecting confidential information. The plea is of infringement and passing off against the defendant and their product. Other posts Rochem v.

Confidentiality 105

Confidentiality Trademark Copyright Patent 105