• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Critically evaluate the factors listed by Laddie J as relevant to deciding whether a claimed invention is obvious to a person skilled in the relevant art. How have they stood the test of time since Haberman v Jackal? Laddie J specifically noted that this list was non-exhaustive. Can you suggest other factors which might reasonably be added to the list?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

In Haberman v Jackal[1], Laddie J provided a list of determination factors that set a narrative for an patented invention?s obviousness. Laddie?s factors aim at scrutinizing the invention for (1) the real problem to be solved thereby, (2) how long this problem existed, (3) the significance of problem with regard to commercial benefits and the efforts that have to be made to provide the solution, (4) the publicity of the problem and popularity in society to solve it, (5) what kind of prior art can be deemed to have been known, and how established was the degree of awareness of said knowledge to those that can be expected to be involved to solve the problem, (6) what kind solutions to the same problem (forefront or not) and how close were those to inventive solution at the time to publication of the subject matter, (7) ...read more.

Middle

provided the ratio. In the cases of Grimme[9], and in particular in Schlumberger[10], the time factor and the long-felt-want in combination with the lack of awareness for the skilled man and the discarded prior art in the industry in accordance with factors (2), (4), (5) played a crucial role for the reasoning leading those decisions. In Virgin[11] the driving factor was that the solution was a forefront development in the industry as set out in factor (6). In Wake Forest University[12] factors (5) and (7) were the base for the court?s decision. However, based on decision solely argued on the factor (8) have not been monitored and thus, factors (3) and (8) are so-called secondary indicia which indicate or underline factors (2), (4) and (5)[13] with regard to IPO?s Examination Guidelines[14] which point out that those commercial realities cannot always be divorced from the kinds of practical outcome as illustrated in Dyson[15]. ...read more.

Conclusion

[5] Paul England, 'Obviousness in the new European Order' (2012) 7 11 Journal of Intellectual Property Law & Practice pp 807, 808 [6] Nokia OYJ (Nokia Corporation v IPCom GmbH & Co KG [2012] EWCA Civ 567 [7] ConvaTec Lts and Ors v Smith & Nephew Healthcare Ltd and Ors [2012] EWCA Civ 520 [8] Gedeon Richter plc v Bayer Pharma AG [2012] EWCA Civ 235 [9] Grimme Landmaschinenfabrik GmbH & Co KG v Scott [2010] EWCA Civ 1110 [10] Schlumberger Holdings Ltd v Electromagnetic Geoservices AS [2010] EWCA Civ 819 [11] Virgin Atlantic Airways Ltd v Premium Aircraft Interiors Group [2009] EWCA Civ 1062 [12] Wake Forest University Health Sciences v Smith & Nephew Plc [2009] EWCA Civ 848 [13] Ibid supra note 5 p 810 [14] Examining for inventive step, and Assessing obviousness Section 3: Inventive step (July 2013, IPO) <http://www.ipo.gov.uk/practice-sec-003.pdf> accessed on 26 September 2013 para 3.25 [15] Dyson v Hoover [2002] RPC 22 ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our University Degree Intellectual Property Law section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related University Degree Intellectual Property Law essays

  1. Implementation of Enterprise system at Dyson

    7.2 Aggression................................................................... 7.3 Projections................................................................... 7.4 Avoidance.................................................................... 7.5 Training staff................................................................. Managing Organizational change and CONCLUSION...........................PAGE 8 8.1 Business process reengineering (BPR)................................. 8.2 Eis implementation to maintain technical details..................... 8.3 Supply chain............................................................... CONCLUSION........................................................................ REFRENCES..........................................................................PAGE 9 INTRODUCTION Dyson has been well established and enjoying its presence in all the geographical regions of the world, containing strong and innovative image of its British ness.

  2. Intellectual Property Right

    determined by many factors, including but by no means limited to IPRs.' (Commission on IPR, 2002) IPR is not a new thing. There was a time when countries could choose their way on IPR and make independent decision on when to introduce legal protection or if it is appropriate to do so.

  1. property law

    the point of equity was never in question in the common law courts, so the point of law or fact, that concerns the law, is never in question in the chancery; and so the same thing is not twice in question, or answered anew for the chancery doth supply the

  2. Contrary to popular belief, the law is reasonably well equipped to deal with computer ...

    or has brought about new criminal activities such as hacking, phishing, the installation and/or transmission of viruses and denial of service17 and distributed denial of service18 (hereinafter DoS & DDoS) attacks. However other authorities19 have subdivided computer assisted traditional criminal activity into computer-related, such as fraud, theft and information seeking,

  1. Discuss using case law what changes the Land Registration Act 2002 has made to ...

    The 2002Act refers to 'events' triggering compulsory registration. The only estates which can continue to have unregistered title are those estates which are not subject to any dealing at all in the title. The 2002Act makes registration compulsory on any event concerning the estate.

  2. Consider the idea of inventions the commercial exploitation of which would be contrary to ...

    Hence, the EPO took on the issues concerning public security, and physical integrity of individuals as part of society[15]. With regard to the above seminal cases, and in line with seminal decision in Regina (in ex parte Quintavalle) v Secretary of State for Health[16] that defined that the term embryo

  1. Critically analyse what makes for sufficient disclosure in the description of a patentable invention, ...

    unitary rule to apply this rationale to all kind of claimed inventions and their disclosure in the specification raised criticism. This lead to a renunciation thereof in Lundbeck[15], whereas Lord Hoffmann, plagued of his own dicta, concluded that the Biogen insufficiency is to be limited to product-by-process claims and therefore his learned friend Kitchen J.

  2. What might be the greatest strengths of the patent system in its modern form, ...

    This ideal image of the patent system on a national base however gets tainted by the fact that in reality the international beneficiaries of modern patent systems are limited to industrial power houses such as Japan, the USA, Germany and Korea which shared a 73 percent of PCT grants in

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work