PATENTS – innovation patent relating to hinges – infringement – validity – whether primary judge erred in the proper construction of the invention disclosed
PATENTS – validity – lack of clear and complete description – classical sufficiency – “relevant range” – s 40(2)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) – whether primary judge erred in finding specifications did not enable skilled addressee to perform invention over the whole area claimed without undue burden
PATENTS – validity – lack of support – s 40(3) of the Act – comparison between invention specified in the claims and that described in the specification – technical contribution to the art
Related cases about Patents
-
Motorola Solutions, Inc. v Hytera Communications Corporation Ltd (Liability) [2022] FCA 1585
PATENTS – Applicant patentee of three method patents relating to digital mobile radios (‘DMR’) using Time Division Multiple Access (‘TDMA’) to divide frequency channel – disputed constructions – fair basing – inventive step – identification of inventive step in claims – manner of manufacture – stare decisis – whether Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v…
-
H Lundbeck A/S v Sandoz Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 740
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – patents – application for stay of remitted proceeding – where High Court upheld primary judge’s declaration that the respondent infringed the first applicant’s patent – where High Court made an order declaring that the first applicant is entitled to damages and pre-judgment interest and an order remitting the proceeding for the…
-
Novartis AG v Pharmacor Pty Limited [2023] FCA 804
PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – patents – where in the principal proceeding the respondent alleges that the patent in suit does not disclose the best method of performing the invention – discovery – where applicants oppose the respondent’s proposed discovery category
