article thumbnail

“Prior public use”: an effective ground for opposition against the grant of a European patent

Garrigues Blog

One of the most effective ways of obtaining the revocation is to prove “prior public use”. One of them is undoubtedly, “prior public use”, since unless the case is very evident, the EPO is not usually able to collect this type of evidence as a result of the search that it conducts for the state of the art during the grant procedure.

article thumbnail

Empowering Innovation: The Role of Intellectual Property in Technology Transfer

IP and Legal Filings

It’s the first important step towards protecting owner’s rights and its lawful public use. If IPR is not understood in technology transfer process, sharing of knowledge and invention faces legal challenges. Before the knowledge or invention is transferred, the owner must make sure they own rights over it.

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

Prior Art: The Patent Pitfall

Larson & Larson

It’s the legal term for ‘thing that is exactly like my thing that was in the public before I made my thing.’ The term covers anything that was sold in public, used publicly, described in a magazine or similar publication, or already has a patent on file with the patent office.

Art 52
article thumbnail

Biosimilars 2020 Year in Review

Fish & Richardson Trademark & Copyright Thoughts

At the same time, market uptake of biosimilars in the United States continued to increase, suggesting that there is room for expansion of biosimilars in the U.S. In addition, fewer new biosimilars entered the market this past year, with five biosimilar launches in 2020 as compared to seven in 2019. Yet biosimilars of anti-TNF?

article thumbnail

Understanding Compulsory Licensing and Access to Essentials

Kashishipr

The concept of compulsory licensing can be said to have arisen out of the obligation within the Statute of Monopolies of 1623, which provided for the provision of utilizing a patented invention to be applied locally. Non-Working of Patent and Inadequate Supply : It may be understood as a failure to make industrial use of the said invention.

Licensing 105
article thumbnail

“What’s Mine Is Not Yours To Give Me”—Nor To Take Without Just Compensation: A New Jersey’s Reaction To Sovereign Immunity, Intellectual Property, & Takings

LexBlog IP

And, it goes like this–the relevant concept in the United States is that a person shall “ no[t] be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.” Maclean Hunter Market Reports, Inc., Wright , 94 U.S.

article thumbnail

The US’ Review of March-in Rights, and Some Questions on an Indian Counterpart

SpicyIP

According to the NIST, the US govt invests approximately $115 billion in R&D through various universities, non-profits, and businesses. March-in rights are provisions that allow the government to require a license for inventions stemming from this investment, upon the fulfilment of certain conditions.