Tag: Currently browsing "Allens Arthur Robinson"
Allens’ new China trademark agency
Allens Arthur Robinson (Allens) has continued its expansion in Greater China with the launch of a new locally licensed Intellectual Property business in China – Allens Arthur Robinson Intellectual Property (Beijing) Limited – handling trade mark applications and associated IP issues. The new Beijing trademark agency is Allens’ fourth office in Greater China, with a full service locally licensed practice in Hong Kong and registered foreign law firm offices in Shanghai and Beijing.
Philip Kerr, head of the Allens global Intellectual Property Group, said: ‘The opening of our new Beijing trademark agency is a very exciting development for our IP Group as it enables the firm to offer full trade mark services in China, something no other Australian firm can offer clients. I believe this new business will complement the services already offered by our other Greater China offices.’ Ted Marr, Practice Manager for the new business, said: ‘This expansion of our Greater China IP practice will mean that we have locally licensed operations for trade mark work in both Hong Kong and China. With the continuing movement of foreign companies into China and the rapid development of legal and enforcement infrastructure for IP in China, this is the perfect time for us to be in China to help our clients protect their trade marks in China.’
Allens’ Asia Executive Partner Jim Dunstan commented: ‘Allens’ point of difference is our ability to service clients across the region. We have the most extensive, integrated legal network of any firm, providing our clients with a seamless service. This latest addition to our network provides clients with the ability to protect their intellectual property in an influential, rapidly growing Asian economy.’
Related Posts
About this entry
- Published:
- 10 May 2008 / 04:30 AM
- Category:
- Trade Marks
- Tags:
- Allens Arthur Robinson, Allens Arthur Robinson Intellectual Property (Beijing) , Beijing, China, enforcement infrastructure, foreign law firm offices, Hong Kong, Intellectual Property Group, IP Group, Jim Dunstan, legal network, Philip Kerr, Shanghai, Ted Marr, trade mark applications, trade mark services
Ajinomoto v NutraSweet [2008] FCAFC 34 - Australia: a resting ground for bad patents?
Richard Hamer, Partner, Josh Budin, Lawyer, and Harry Evans, Articled Clerk of Allens Arthur Robinson review Ajinomoto v NutraSweet [2008] FCAFC 34. According to Allens Arthur Robinson, the decision has been described by the judges involved as ‘making Australia a resting ground for bad patents’ and as ‘parochial and unwise’. For patent owners, however, it offers greater confidence in the validity of many Australian patents. Although information about these developments is available in Australia, in many fields there is no actual research being carried out in Australia. In these fields, Australian patents filed before 1 April 2002 have a relatively good chance of surviving an obviousness attack.
At first instance, Justice Finkelstein did not consider the requirement for information to be ‘relevant to work in the relevant art in Australia’. However, he commented that information widely circulated in Australia should not be ignored just because there was no work done in the relevant industry in Australia as at the priority date. His Honour said that if such information was ignored, ‘Australia would become a resting ground for bad patents’.
Related Posts
About this entry
- Published:
- 10 May 2008 / 04:10 AM
- Category:
- Patents
IP Casenotes
IP Casenotes from the Australian Intellectual Property Law Bulletin (Vol 19 No 8, January 2007) include:
- Meskenas v ACP Publishing (2006) 92-216 (Raphael FM) - Kristin Stammer, Partner and Orana Swan, Senior Solicitor at Freehills
- Woolworths Ltd v BP plc [2006] FCAFC (Heerey, Young and Allsop JJ) - Melanie Goldwater, Lawyer, Minter Ellison
- Merck & Co Inc v Arrow Pharmaceuticals Ltd (2006) 68 IPR 511 - Megan Nann, Lawyer, Allens Arthur Robinson
Link to Australian Intellectual Property Law Bulletin (Vol 19 No 8, January 2007)
Related Posts
About this entry
- Published:
- 31 Jan 2007 / 04:56 AM
- Category:
- Copyright, Patents, Trade Marks