Embracing enforcement and examinations – Asia-Pacific IP Focus launched

Managing IP is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Embracing enforcement and examinations – Asia-Pacific IP Focus launched

editorial-adobestock-440916445.jpg

IP experts have come together in Asia-Pacific IP Focus to provide insight into IP developments for 2021 and beyond.

Managing IP’s 2021 Asia-Pacific IP Focus looks at a series of thought-provoking IP developments across China, India, Japan and South Korea, that have come to the forefront during the past few months.

Interaction with national patent offices is a seminal topic in this guide, as countries respond to the increasing use of enforcement and examinations, while contending with how to react to the changes under IP law.

In June 2021, China’s amended patent law came into force, with notable wider protection offered for designs. Through the use of case studies, the article by DEQI Intellectual Property explains how applicants can overcome office actions concerning substantive defects of design applications.

Arguments for inventive step in the Japan Patent Office examination can be categorised into five particular groups: fact finding, matter of design, motivation, obstructive factor and effect. If an applicant can persuade the examiner to accept any one of these arguments, the rejection of inventive step is overturned. Shiga International Patent Office’s article presents a statistical analysis of the effectiveness of such arguments in the examination.

The Indian Patent Office has often been seen to interpret Section 59 of the Indian Patent Act in a highly restrictive manner, thus raising barriers to amendment. The authors from Anand and Anand explore the limits of claim amendments in India and call for modification to the rules to reflect global standards.

Through a set of example cases, FirstLaw PC’s article outlines the investigation procedure that can be sought by IP holders against unfair international trade practices involving IP infringement through the Korea Trade Commission’s proceedings. Corrective measures, penalties and remedies for such infringement are cited in further detail.

As the investment climate bounces back in the Asia-Pacific, IP queries and research and development looks set to grow in the coming year. We hope that you enjoy hearing from the IP experts leading the progression in our Asia-Pacific IP Focus.

Prin Shasiharan

Senior commercial editor

Managing IP

Click here to read all the chapters from Asia-Pacific IP Focus 2021

more from across site and SHARED ros bottom lb

More from across our site

The combined entity, which is expected to offer IP services across Australia and New Zealand, will be called Jones Maxwell Smith & Davis
The Iconix v Dream Pairs dispute, to be heard at the UK Supreme Court, concerns trademarks owned by sports brand Umbro and the issue of post-sale confusion
The European IP team from Simmons & Simmons discusses the current approaches to IP enforcement against look-a-like or copycat products
Ten firms have each received more than 11 nominations, while more than 20 in-house counsel are up for awards
Yanfeng Xiong discusses 6am wake ups, honing his basketball skills, and how he prioritises tasks
Saina Shamilov explains how she convinced the Federal Circuit to upend the US ITC’s domestic industry analysis
Christopher Kinkade and Naira Simmons reveal the distributed firm’s hiring hopes for 2025, a little more than a year after it was founded
A CJEU copyright decision on employees' rights and an update on an IP feud concerning foreign rights over 'Superman' were also among the top talking points
Counsel explain how firms advising PTAB petitioners may react to the USPTO’s decision to ditch Fintiv guidance
The recruits include another former Stobbs lawyer, as well as a chief technology officer and chief financial officer
Gift this article