PATENTS – appeal from decision of primary judge dismissing applicant’s claim of infringement of patents for jump starter device, declaring patents to be invalid and revoking patents – whether primary judge erred in finding that certain claims would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art in light of the common general knowledge – whether primary judge erred in finding that certain claims would have been obvious to a person skilled in the art in light of the common general knowledge combined with prior art documents – whether primary judge erred in finding that certain claims were not disclosed in the earlier PCT application and therefore were not entitled to the earlier priority date – whether primary judge erred in finding that a device which could operate in a “manual mode” was outside the scope of certain claims – reasoning of primary judge upheld – appeal dismissed PATENTS – notice of contention – whether primary judge erred in failing to consider whether PCT application disclosed a device which allows manual operation – ground rejected – whether primary judge erred in finding that the relevant date for knowledge of best method for the purpose of s 40(2)(aa) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) is the date of filing of the parent application, not the date of filing of the divisional application – ground upheld – other grounds of contention not considered
Original article available at: https://www.judgments.fedcourt.gov.au/judgments/Judgments/fca/full/2026/2026fcafc0044For more information, see the original judgement.
