In October 2024, Delegate C. Mitchell of the Australian Patent Office upheld a decision to reject AFT Pharmaceuticals’ (AFT) drug combination patent applications – AU2022201576 (’576) and its divisional child
CQMS has successfully opposed ESCO Group’s (ESCO) patent application AU 2018201726 (‘726) on the grounds of lack of support and sufficiency. We previously reported on an opposition between the same parties for a related patent family member AU 2018201710 (‘710). As with that case, the Delegate in the present opposition exercised his authority under section 60(3) of the Patents Act 1990 and raised the additional opposition ground of inutility, which was not asserted by CQMS.
CQMS Triumphs in Patent Opposition Against ESCO Group
MMD has been unsuccessful again in their infringement suit against Camco Engineering and also in their allegation that Camco contravened the Australian Consumer Law.
An Australian Court has found in favour of Globaltech which solved a mining problem with an elegant solution. An important lesson from this decision is that driving IP innovation can be central to maintaining a market-leading position.
In this patent infringement/validity dispute, Hanwha failed to establish that REC infringed its “old Act” Australian patent No 2008323025, and its dependant ACL claims were dismissed.
In this patent infringement/validity dispute, Hanwha failed to establish that REC infringed its “old Act” Australian patent No 2008323025, and its dependant ACL claims were dismissed.
In this patent infringement/validity dispute, Hanwha failed to establish that REC infringed its “old Act” Australian patent No 2008323025, and its dependant ACL claims were dismissed.
In this patent infringement/validity dispute, Hanwha failed to establish that REC infringed its “old Act” Australian patent No 2008323025, and its dependant ACL claims were dismissed.