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
-
Calix Limited v Grenof Pty Ltd [2023] FCA 378
PATENTS – claim for method of producing hydroxide slurries – construction of claim – whether claim infringed – whether s 121A of Patents Act 1990 (Cth) (“the Act”) applied to place onus on the respondents – whether Court satisfied that it was very likely that respondents’ product was made by the patented process – whether claim…
-
Aristocrat Technologies Australia Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2022] HCA 29 (17 August 2022)
Patents – Invention – Manner of manufacture – Where appellant manufactured electronic gaming machines (“EGMs”) – Where appellant owned four innovation patents concerning various embodiments of EGM – Where specification described claimed invention as combination of player interface, being physical features of EGM, and game controller, being computerised components interacting with player interface to implement…
Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2024/2024fcafc0095
For more information, see the original judgement.
