Patent Prosecution
January 5, 2023
Starting on February 1st, the US Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) will offer accelerated examination for patent applications aimed at preventing cancer and cancer mortality.
February 24, 2022
The US CAFC ruled that an examiner is a "person of ordinary skill in the art" and is owed an appropriate level of deference.
February 7, 2022
Patent applicants may wish to request examination for their Canadian patent applications soon to take advantage of the fees under the current Patent Rules.
January 13, 2022
Some of the most common errors made in patent applications are in the naming of applicants and inventors. If the mistake is not caught in time, it can cause a nasty headache for the patent owner.
November 15, 2021
2021 CACP 42: Cementing its post-Choueifaty approach to patentable subject-matter in Canada, the PAB found all claimed elements to be essential in the computer-implemented invention.
June 18, 2020
In a patent infringement case between two major ice skate manufacturers, the Federal Court clarified s. 53.1 and the admissibility of prosecution history.
September 13, 2019
2019 FC 1065 – Canada's Federal Court ruled that two fiber optics patents were obvious in light of an admission made in the background sections.
July 8, 2019
The CAFC reminds lower courts that software patents are valid where they claim a particular improvement in how the outcome is achieved.
April 30, 2019
Fed. Cir. 2017-2257 - CAFC Reaffirms: GUI That Merely Collects and Displays Data Is Not Patentable
November 2, 2018
Bill C-86 – The omnibus bill creates ambiguity in authorized representation before the Patent Office and the Office of the Registrar of Trade-marks.
July 24, 2018
2018 FCA 36 - The Federal Court of Appeal upheld the Federal Court decision dismissing the application from the Governors of the University of Alberta and Alberta Health Services for judicial review of the Commissioner’s decisions refusing reinstatement of a patent application.
September 12, 2017
2017 FC 402 - The FC dismissed the University of Alberta’s application for judicial review of three CIPO decisions, effectively refusing to declare the patent application in question in good standing following the failure of the original applicants to reply to a requisition and to apply to reinstate the application within the 12-month grace period.
August 15, 2017
2017 FC 178 - The FC dismissed a request by Bayer for judicial review of a Commissioner’s decision refusing to change the priority filing date for Bayer’s Canadian patent application, based on provisions in the Patent Act and Patent Rules relating to priority claims.