Search results for

Practicing since 1935

The IP Strategic Outline sets an ambitious programme for transforming the practice of intellectual property in Japan. The success of the plan depends on cooperation at a national and international level, explain Douglas Clark, Lloyd Parker and Takamasa Makita

Pedro Luis Ogazon 17, Col. San Angel

Beselerstr 4

Hendaya No 60, 4th Floor

Svetlana B Felitsyna, Natalia A Serpkova, Sergey Y Yakovlev and Leonid E Goukasyan of Sojuzpatent in Moscow provide an overview of intellectual property protection available in the Russian Federation, and examine the proposed changes to the trade mark regime

On May 22 this year, the US Supreme Court decided the most eagerly-awaited patent case in many years, Festo v SMC. The case addresses a key issue for patent holders: what protection is available under the doctrine of equivalents. But was the decision as important as many people have claimed? What effect will it have for patent applicants and litigants in the US? And what impact will it have on the US Patent and Trademark Office, the Federal Circuit and district courts? MIP invited six senior IP practitioners in the US to a round table discussion, held at the Washington DC offices of Finnegan Henderson, to discuss the implications of the Festo decision, as well as other recent patent cases. James Nurton moderated the discussion

A survey of patent cases heard in the English High Court has indicated that only eight out of 23 reported cases last year were decided in favour of the patentee.

Denominations of origin recognized by an international treaty must be respected in Colombia without the local authorities having to declare them denominations of origin once again.

The US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit's infamous Festo decision has led to countless debates as to how careful one should now be when amending the claims of US patent applications during prosecution before the USPTO. The US Supreme Court, in its judgment rendered in May 2002, has partially softened the harsh impact of the CAFC's original decision, which applied a file wrapper estoppel completely barring the use of the doctrine of equivalents in subsequent infringement proceedings as far as the amended portion of the claim was concerned.