Yeda Yeda Yeda The ruling in Rhône-Poulenc Rorer International Holdings Inc and another v Yeda Research and Development Co Ltd [2006] EWHC 160 (Ch), which the IPKat blogged earlier today, is now available in full on BAILII.
Lacking the benefit of hindsight
GE Healthcare Ltd v PerkinElmer Life Sciences (UK) Ltd and another [2006] EWHC 214 (Pat), a Patents Court decision of Mr Justice Kitchin, has just surfaced via All England Direct.
GE sued PerkinElmer for infringement of a patent for a ‘scintillation proximity test’, which had a priority date of 18 August 1997. PerkinElmer, who sold an imaging system in the UK called ‘ViewLux' (right), together with a US company brought a counterclaim for revocation of the patent or for a declaration that the US company was entitled to the patent. Accordingt to PerkinElmer the patent was invalid because it wasn't novel and involved no inventive step having regard to common general knowledge. Kitchin J ruled that, even being careful to avoid hindsight reasoning, GE's invention was obvious in light of the general common knowledge and the patent would be revoked.The IPKat doesn't believe that you can eliminate hindsight when considering inventive step. That's what makes it so annoying. If you agree, tell the UK Patents Office and they'll propose abolishing it.
Croats take Vienna by stormThe IPKat is delighted to learn that, by Vienna (Classification) Notification No.24, the World Intellectual Property Organization has announced that the Republic of Croatia has acceded to the Vienna Agreement Establishing an International Classification of the Figurative Elements of Marks.
Victorious Croats (left) will protect the figurative elements of Viennese pastries (right) as trade marks
The Agreement enters into force for Croatia, on 9 May 2006 - better known as The Day of the 5K Run at this year's INTA Meeting in Toronto.
22 Vienna members here
Figurative elements of Marx here and here
