|
August 4th, 2011 Bugle Editorial StaffAkarsh Belagodu You receive the Association of Patent Law Firms’ e-newsletter free in your mail box. If you wish to cancel your subscription, please click on the link “Cancel subscription” at the bottom of the e-newsletter.
Quick links to this issue’s stories…AIPF News
IP Law Updates
For IP Practitioners — Notes and Comments on Improving Practice SkillsMember Firms in the News
AIPF NewsAnnual Meeting Agenda: Enhancing IP Rights in a Time of Erosion June 22, 2011 – Fort Lee, NJ – The Association of Intellectual Property Firms (AIPF) will hold its Annual Meeting September 18-20 in Chicago and will present the theme “Enhancing IP Rights in a Time of Erosion” from a variety of perspectives. Upcoming WebIPHours™ Wednesday, August 10, 2011 at 12:30 PM EDT The Point of Balance: When Inventions Make a Technical Contribution Presented by Bruce C. Dearling, Hepworth Browne In the areas of business methods, games and computer-implemented inventions (“CIIs”), Applicants and Patent Examiners alike experience difficulties in identifying the point when a good idea becomes protectable under patent statute. Often, international patent systems (such as the European Patent Convention) want to see some form of “technical contribution” that promotes a good idea into something worthy of patent rights, but when does the tipping point occur? Wednesday, October 12, 2011 at 12:30 PM EDT Quirky Canucks: Eccentricities of the Canadian Trade-mark System Presented by Jeffrey Vicq and Michael Roman, Clark Wilson LLP Canada’s absence from many international trade-mark law-related treaties, its status as a bilingual country, its unique prohibited marks regime, its antiquated non-traditional marks system and other eccentricities can present challenges for uninformed filers. (Plus we even spell “trade-mark” a little differently!) This presentation will highlight many of the opportunities and traps that ought to be considered when planning the Canadian component of a trade-mark portfolio. Connect with the AIPF Blogs Do you or your firm have a blog? The AIPF would like to list and link to all member blogs on the website. Please send your blog information to [email protected] for the new BLOGS page at www.aipf.com. Social Media The AIPF is on:
Join the conversations! IP Law UpdatesUSPTO Seeks Comments on Leahy-Smith America Invents Act The Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (AIA), H.R. 1249, passed by the U.S. House of Representatives on June 23, 2011, and currently pending before the U.S. Senate, proposes significant and far-reaching changes to U.S. patent law. Although patent reform legislation is still pending before Congress and neither its passage nor enactment can be presumed, the USPTO would like to proactively engage with the public to best prepare for the timely and effective implementation of the legislation should it be enacted.
No ‘Good Faith’ Attacks After a Patent Issues: The Federal Court of Appeals Clarifies s. 73(1)(a) of the Patent Act A. Sasha Mandy | ROBIC|Lawyers, Patent and Trademark Agents – [email protected] On July 18, 2011, the Federal Court of Appeal rendered its judgment in Corlac Inc. v. Weatherford Canada Inc. . The case is of significant importance to applicants and litigants in Canada because it settles the law with regard to the duty of good faith owed by applicants to the Patent Office during the prosecution of their patent applications. However, it also raises questions about the applicability of s. 73 of the Patent Act, as well as about the long-held test for obviousness.
Patent Reform Act 2011: Summary of Post-Grant Review Proceedings Azy Kokabi, Sughrue Mion, PLLC – [email protected] Both the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate have now passed legislation – the America Invents Act (Senate Bill, S. 23 and House Bill, H.R. 1249) – that would introduce post-grant patent revocation proceedings into U.S. Patent law. This article summarizes the post-grant review process articulated in Chapter 32 of both S. 23 and H.R. 1249 and identifies the differences between the Senate and House bills. For IP Practitioners — Notes and Comments on Improving Practice SkillsTrademark Cancellations and Oppositions in China Xiang Gao, Peksung Intellectual Property Ltd. – [email protected] When your company is planning to apply for registration of a trademark in China, you may find that the trademark has been previously applied for or Member Firms in the NewsAIPF welcomes Emily Yip & Co. as new members!
AIPF MembersBackström & Co. Attorneys · Beyer Law Group · Caesar, Rivise, Bernstein, Cohen & Pokotilow, Ltd. · Castro & Pal Abogados · Create IP · De Chalains · Dumont Bergman, Bider & Co, S.C. · Erick M. Pelton & Associates, PLLC · Estudio Colmenares & Associates · FB Rice · Fernandez Secco & Asociados · Guerra · Hepworth Browne · Hovey Williams LLP · Kilburn & Strode LLP · Lilenfeld PC · Maiwald Patentanwalts GmbH · MBM Intellectual Property Law · Millen, White, Zelano & Branigan P.C. · Ostrolenk Faber LLP · Peksung Intellectual Property Ltd. · Price, Heneveld, Cooper, DeWitt & Litton · Ridout & Maybee LLP · Robic, LLP · Rothwell, Figg, Ernst & Manbeck, P.C. · Sughrue Mion, PLLC · Thomas, Kayden, Horstemeyer & Risley, L.L.P. · Trung Thuc JSC · Valadares Law Professional Corporation LLP |
