Intellectual Property Appellate Board (Chennai) dismisses Bayer’s request for a stay on compulsory license for sorafenib

Posted on by Thiru

On 12 March 2012 the Controller General of Patents,Designs & Trademarks of India issued an order granting a compulsory license under Section 84 of the Patents Act (1970) to Natco in patent number 215758 granted to Bayer covering the anti-drug sorafenib toslyate. KEI filed an affidavit in this compulsory licensing dispute involving Natco and Bayer. Following the issuance of a compulsory license, Bayer requested the Intellectual Property Appellate Board (IPAB) to issue a stay on the compulsory license.

Continue Reading →

Uncategorized

Data on Chinese patent applications and grants suggests growing gap between political rhetoric and current realities

Posted on by James Love

The GOP platform mentions China 15 times, including these passages:

Our serious trade disputes, especially China’s failure to enforce international standards for the protection of intellectual property and copyrights, as well as its manipulation of its currency, call for a firm response from a new Republican Administration. . .

Continue Reading →

September 2011: Spotlight on India at the WTO Trade Policy Review

Posted on by Thiru

On 14 September 2011 and 16 September 2011, the World Trade Organization (WTO) undertook a trade policy review of India. All members of the WTO are subject to review under the Trade Policy Review Mechanism (TPRM). The TPRM takes place in the “Trade Policy Review Body which is actually the WTO General Council — comprising the WTO’s full membership — operating under special rules and procedures” (Source: WTO, Trade Policy Reviews: Brief Introduction). Continue Reading →

Birch Bayh’s competing interests and evolving views

Posted on by James Love

The 1980 Bayh-Dole Act is named after two former US Senators, Birch Bayh and Bob Dole. In 2002 both claimed the Bayh-Dole Act march-in provisions were not intended to address cases where prices for inventions are unreasonable, and Senator Bayh repeated this view during a 2004 march-in case involving Abbott patents on ritonavir.

Among the provisions of the Act that suggest otherwise are the following:

Continue Reading →

Federal Circuit decision again results in three-way split in reasoning in AMP v. USPTO; 2-1 ruling upholds DNA patents

Posted on by Krista Cox

On Thursday, 16 August 2012, the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit issued its opinion in the case Association for Molecular Pathology v. US Patent and Trademark Office, again rejecting the plaintiffs’ contentions that isolated DNA is not eligible for patent protection. This case surrounds the patent eligibility of isolated DNA, particularly the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes known to be associated with an individual’s susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer.

Continue Reading →

Uncategorized

ISP sources defend USTR proposals in TPP on copyright limitations: undermine opposition to USTR proposal

Posted on by James Love

A story today by Adam Behsudi in the trade publication, Inside U.S. Trade, quotes from ISP industry sources who basically defend the USTR position, which is the worst among the TPP negotiating countries. Taken as a whole, we read the ISP positions as both weak and incredibly damaging, as they are undercutting real opposition to the USTR proposal by non-US governments in the TPP negotiations. Continue Reading →

Uncategorized