• Interference Statute Does Not Require Diligence For Re-Presenting Claims

    In In re: Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organisation, the Federal Circuit held that pre-AIA 35 USC §135(b)(1) does not embody a diligence requirement, such that interfering claims presented more than 5 years after originally presented claims were abandoned were not time-barred by the statute. Although the decision was non-precedential, because it reversed a decision … Continue reading this entry

    Continue Reading ...
  • Singapore Treaty to be in Force for OAPI by Mid-February

    Trademarks and Valentines, a natural pairing.

    With all the attention Africa’s been getting globally and our pride’s attention drawn to happenings hitting even close to our hearts, some details have slipped through the grass.  But never fear, like all good lions, we manage a pounce in the end.  This time, this straggling little leo has rounded back on a WIPO announcement from a few weeks ago: OAPI has joined the Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks.  Full WIPO press announcement here.

    Administrative Harmonization

    The Singapore Treaty on the Law of Trademarks, known as STLT in the WIPO community, seeks to harmonize the administration of trademarks.  It covers everything from registration to license recordation.  It does this by setting limitations on the types of processes and information that can be required by a trademark office.  For example: trademark offices cannot require notarization of application signatures (Article 8(3)(b)); there are 16 pieces of information that trademark offices may require be included in an application (Article 3(1)(a)); and applicants must use the Nice classification system (Article 9).

    But License Redecoration Remains

    Interestingly, although the purpose of STLT is to harmonize administrative procedures, parties are able to opt out of provisions under certain circumstances (in Article 29), and OAPI has done just that.  Articles 6 and 19(2) will not apply to OAPI.  Article 19(2) of STLT prohibits parties from requiring the recordation of licenses for enforcement.  However, Article 27 of the Bangui Agreement, which governs OAPI, requires the recordation of a trademark license with the OAPI Special Register of Marks in order for the license to be enforceable against third parties.  The pre-existing Bangui Agreement rule stands.
    Article 6 of STLT says “Where goods and/or services belonging to several classes of the Nice Classification have been included in one and the same application, such an application shall result in one and the same registration.”  Little Leo has to admit, she’s not really sure what it means to opt out of this.  [And based on the way WIPO presented it in the press release, neither are they.]  Perhaps it means applications listing goods or services in multiple Nice classes will result in multiple registrations.  Conjectures, explanations from wiser readers and wild guesses are welcome.

    A Growing Party

    The addition of OAPI brings the official number of STLT members to 41.  That number is a little misleading since OAPI itself includes 17 countries.  Seven OAPI members are signatories to STLT, dating back to 2006 and 2007, but only Mali (2009) and Benin (2012) ratified the treaty as individual countries.  The treaty comes into effect for OAPI, and Benin and Mali individually, all on the same day: February 13, 2016.  Just in time for Valentine’s Day.  That will bring the number of countries participating in the STLT harmonization to 54*.  The full list is available from WIPO here.

    *If the math doesn’t seem to work out, it’s because there are other multi-state members whose countries are also individually members.

    Image information: “Little Debbie Valentine Snack Cakes, 2/2015, by Mike Mozart of TheToyChannel and JeepersMedia on YouTube” CC-BY 2.0 Mike Mozart, available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/jeepersmedia/15908525213

    Continue Reading ...
  • IPR: Proving Patentability before Amendment

    By Dennis Crouch In Prolitec, Inc. v. ScentAir Technologies,[1] the Federal Circuit has affirmed a USPTO inter partes review (IPR) decision cancelling Prolitec’s air-freshener diffuser claims.  The patent at issue[2] is the subject of a co-pending lawsuit between the parties that was stayed in 2013 — awaiting the IPR outcome.[3] Here, the patent included a claim […]

    Continue Reading ...
  • Tech News Roundup: Bezos and Musk Square Off, LED ‘Li-Fi’ Internet and VTech Data Breach

    Our latest Tech Round-Up here on IPWatchdog takes a brief glance at many of the stories which have caught our attention in recent days. As he often does, Elon Musk takes center-stage in a couple of news items regarding challenges he’ll be facing in the realms of space travel as well as electric vehicles. In Europe, the first successful installation of light-based wireless Internet could be the first step in a new age of Internet connectivity. Data breaches and genetically modified foods round…

    Continue Reading ...
  • Final Written Decision Finding Evidence of Commercial Success Unpersuasive IPR2014-00585

    Takeaway:  An obviousness analysis need not seek out precise teachings directed to the specific subject matter of the challenged claim, for a court can take account of the inferences and creative steps that a person of ordinary skill in the … Continue reading

    The post Final Written Decision Finding Evidence of Commercial Success Unpersuasive IPR2014-00585 appeared first on PTAB Trial Blog.

    Continue Reading ...