Asia-Pacific IP Focus 2021 (August 2021)

Main

Embracing enforcement and examinations – Asia-Pacific IP Focus launched

How to respond to an office action concerning substantive defects of design applications in China

Evaluating the restrictive nature of amending patent claims in India

A closer look at the arguments effective for inventive step in the JPO examination

Examining the IP enforcement procedure before the KTC

Editorial

Embracing enforcement and examinations – Asia-Pacific IP Focus launched

Features / Articles

How to respond to an office action concerning substantive defects of design applications in China

Evaluating the restrictive nature of amending patent claims in India

A closer look at the arguments effective for inventive step in the JPO examination

Examining the IP enforcement procedure before the KTC

Sponsored

Sponsored

Sponsored by DEQI Intellectual Property Law Corporation

How to respond to an office action concerning substantive defects of design applications in China

Yanling Zhou of DEQI Intellectual Property presents a case study to depict how an applicant should seek to respond to an office action of an obvious substantive defect

Yanling Zhou, August 18, 2021
Sponsored by FirstLaw PC

Examining the IP enforcement procedure before the KTC

Kye Young Lee of the Korea Trade Commission and Hyoun Ja Park of FirstLaw PC introduce the remedies that can be sought by IP holders against unfair international trade practices involving IP infringement through the KTC’s proceedings

Hyoun-Ja Park, August 18, 2021
Sponsored by Shiga International Patent Office

A closer look at the arguments effective for inventive step in the JPO examination

Kenji Tanaka of Shiga International Patent Office conducts a statistical analysis of the effectiveness of arguments for inventive step in the Japan Patent Office examination

Kenji Tanaka, August 18, 2021