Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved.
JIPLP Express |
JIPLP Express
A rapid-read overview of the main items in this issue
| The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below. |
 |
Current Intelligence |
|---|
Patents
A fair reward for inventors. In a case concerning inventors' compensation, the Patents Court held that as the patent in question was of outstanding benefit to the employer, it was just that employees should receive a ‘Fair share’ of the benefit to the employer. (p. 383)
Secondary considerations of non-obviousness must still be considered. A US District Court erred in granting summary judgment of obviousness and in failing to consider secondary considerations of non-obviousness. (p. 384)
Takeda entitled to fees based, in part, on baseless certifications. The Federal Circuit affirmed the trial court's award to a plaintiff of over US$16 m in attorney fees based on baseless invalidity and unenforceability defences asserted by the defendants not just at trial, but also in their Notices of Paragraph IV certifications. (p. 386)
Commercial success of XanGo juice insufficient to overcome obviousness in ex parte re-examination. With respect to a patent directed to
Trade marks
Copyright
Plant variety rights
General
|
Practice Point |
|---|
Patent attorneys and conflicts of interest (p. 407)
|
Articles |
|---|
‘The Byzantine logic of patent law jurisprudence’: patent protection for dosage regimes revisited (p. 415)
Building a trade secrets system in Jordan: a critique of the current legal framework (p. 425)
Lucasfilm v Ainsworth: the English strike back (p. 434)
Public health and the preservation of economic competitiveness: the European supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products (p. 439)
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?