Remove us-national-phase-firm
article thumbnail

How to Choose a US National Phase Firm: PCT to US National Stage Entry

Patent Trademark Blog

What should PCT applicants look for in a US national phase firm? When it comes to entering the US national phase, PCT applicants have a lot of options. Should you go with a big firm or small firm? Can a boutique IP firm handle US patent filings for a large client?

article thumbnail

Publicly Traded International Patent Firms

Patently-O

by Dennis Crouch In October 2022, Canada’s largest intellectual property firm became a publicly traded entity. Smart & Biggar , a firm that includes 100+ Canadian patent attorneys and agents (most of whom are also registered with the USPTO) was purchased by the Australian company IPH Limited. billion USD).

Patent 125
Insiders

Sign Up for our Newsletter

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

article thumbnail

Friday Fancies

The IPKat

EPO soften priority rules in G1/22 and G2/22 This week, the Enlarged Board of Appeal (EBA) of the European Patent Office softened its rules on priority with the effect that it is now more likely that a priority claim will be valid even if there is a different applicant for the EPO application than for the priority application.

article thumbnail

SpicyIP Weekly Review (August 7- August 13)

SpicyIP

Mathews discussed the Delhi High Court’s order directing for strict interpretation of the PCT timelines while filing the national phase applications. Drop us a comment below! Other Posts Timelines under Rule 138 of Patent Rules are to be interpreted strictly and there cannot be any leeway under Rule 49.6

article thumbnail

Delay in filing Request for Examination due to negligence of legal counsel – Madras High Court orders restoration of the abandoned patent application – India

Selvam & Selvam Blog

November 4, 2022: The Madras High Court allowed the two writ petitions filed by the applicant with respect to two patent applications that were deemed abandoned by the Indian Patent Office on account of delay in filing the Request for Examination. In Chandra Sekar Vs. The Controller of Patents and Designs & Anr.