Maintaining a Patent in Force and Extending the Patent Term

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Philip W. Grubb ◽  
Peter R. Thomsen ◽  
Tom Hoxie ◽  
Gordon Wright
Keyword(s):  
Trips Agreement ◽  
Filing Date ◽  
Legal Term ◽  
Patent Term ◽  
The Us

This chapter discusses the maintenance and extension of patent terms. Applicants who receive patents in the countries in which they applied must be aware that these patents do not go on indefinitely. Subject to any extension provisions, these have a fixed legal term that, in most countries, is twenty years from filing as required by the TRIPs Agreement. This means that, if a continuation or continuation-in-part application is filed after that date, the twenty-year term does not run from the filing date of that application, but from that of the parent application. It used to be that refiling an application, by delaying the granting of the patent, extended the patent term, but this is no longer the case. The remainder of the chapter covers renewal fees; the effect of changes in patent term; patent term adjustment in the US; extensions to compensate for regulatory delays; and licences of right.

Voluntary accounting changes and post-earnings announcement drift

2015 ◽  
Vol 23 (1) ◽  
pp. 2-16 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yi-Ching Chen ◽  
Tawei Wang ◽  
Jia-Lang Seng
Keyword(s):  
Design Methodology ◽  
Accounting Choice ◽  
Filing Date ◽  
Market Reactions ◽  
Earnings Announcement ◽  
Content Type ◽  
Post Earnings Announcement Drift ◽  
Announcement Date ◽  
The Us ◽  
Accounting Changes

Purpose – The purpose of this paper is to investigate the relation between voluntary accounting changes (VACs) and post-earnings announcement drift. In addition, the authors examine how accounting choice heterogeneity moderates such association. Design/methodology/approach – The authors collect VAC firms in the US in the period from 1994 to 2008 and identify the heterogeneity of accounting choices between VAC and non-VAC firms. To test the hypotheses, the authors consider a 10-Q filing window and a post-filing drift window. The 10-Q filing window begins from one trading day before and ends on one trading day after the quarterly report filing date. The post-filing drift window begins from two trading days after the filing date and ends on 60 trading days with respect to the earnings announcement date. Findings – The results demonstrate that, overall, VAC does not affect the three-day market reactions to 10-Q filings. However, after taking into account the accounting choice heterogeneity, the authors observe that VAC is positively related to the market reactions to surprises and negatively associated with the post-filing period drift. Originality/value – The paper contributes to the literature by showing that VACs affect the market’s responses to 10-Q filings only when such change results in different accounting practices compared to the VAC firm’s major competitors. Furthermore, given the change with heterogeneity requires more time to process, VACs are related to post-filing announcement drift.

Ch.8 Industrial Designs

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Correa Carlos Maria
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
The Us

This chapter focuses on industrial designs, which are generally defined as features of ornamentation applied to an article. They consist of the shape, configuration, pattern, or ornament—or a combination thereof—of a product that gives it eye-appeal. Industrial designs normally exclude those designs determined solely by their utilitarian function on an article. The protection of industrial designs is addressed in the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement by only two Articles. Article 25 defines the requirements for protection, and Article 26 the extent of exclusive rights and the admissible exceptions. This scant treatment reflects the fact that the protection of industrial designs had a low priority in the TRIPS negotiations for the US and other countries, except perhaps the European Communities (EC), which aimed at enhancing such protection, of particular value, for instance, for fashion industries.

Ch.10 Layout-Designs (topographies) of Integrated Circuits

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Correa Carlos Maria
Keyword(s):  
Intellectual Property ◽  
Property Rights ◽  
Integrated Circuits ◽  
World Trade Organization ◽  
Intellectual Property Rights ◽  
World Trade ◽  
Trips Agreement ◽  
National Treatment ◽  
The Us ◽  
Treatment Principle

This chapter demonstrates how World Trade Organization (WTO) Members are bound to accord the treatment provided for in the Trade-related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement to the natural or legal persons that meet the criteria of eligibility for protection provided for under the 1989 Washington Treaty on Intellectual Property in Respect of Integrated Circuits, subject to the exceptions to the national treatment principle provided for therein (Article 3.1 of the TRIPS Agreement). Section 6, Part II, of the TRIPS Agreement essentially obliges Members to comply with the Washington Treaty. This obligation applies irrespective of the fact that the Treaty never entered into force. The protection of integrated circuits is the newest chapter in the intellectual property field. The first country to introduce a sui generis regime with that purpose was the US in 1984, followed by Japan in May 1985. With Section 6 of the TRIPS Agreement, the US and Japan obtained what they were unable to reach with the negotiation of the Washington Treaty. The Agreement gave them an opportunity to correct what they deemed weaknesses of the Washington Treaty, notably, the provisions relating to compulsory licenses, importation of products containing infringing semiconductors, and innocent infringement.

Exploring cyberbullying: a socio-semiotic perspective

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (2) ◽  
pp. 359-378
Author(s):  
Le Cheng ◽  
Xitao Hu ◽  
Aleksandra Matulewska ◽  
Anne Wagner
Keyword(s):  
Children And Adolescents ◽  
International Perspective ◽  
General Context ◽  
Use Of Technology ◽  
Legal Term ◽  
The Us ◽  
Perpetrators And Victims ◽  
Semiotic Perspective ◽  
The Eu

Abstract With the wide application of Internet, the negative sides related to cyberspace become prominent, including cyberbullying. In such a sense, it is necessary to delimit and define cyberbullying as one important legal term for some relevant cybercrimes. Cyberbullying, in its different forms, is common among children and adolescents, and is facilitated by the increased use of technology. But there is no global legal definition and standard in this area. The authors consider it significant to take into account the international perspective of instrumentalization of law in respect of cyberbullying, which may lead to the formulation of such a definition. This article first explores the definitions, legal mechanisms and its relevant laws in the US, the EU and China to find out their similarities and differences. It is found that cyberbullying as a sign is socially-constituted, is interpreted differently in various jurisdictions, which indicates that the exploration of a sign should be located within and is intertwined with social, cultural and historical backgrounds. This research, as a case study, also provides useful implications for the understanding and interpretation of legal terms in a more general context. At the same time, cultures nowadays pervade one another, and so phenomena that were initially local may quickly and unexpectedly become global. This is the case of cyberbullying, initially associated with children and adolescents as perpetrators and victims, being now also practiced by adults who harass other adults.

scholarly journals Innovative Space Occupied By Indian Pharmaceutical Industry: Future Prospects

2020 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Industry ◽  
Patient Outcomes ◽  
Price Competition ◽  
Patent Protection ◽  
Drug Product ◽  
Profit Margins ◽  
Patent Term ◽  
The Us ◽  
Generic Products ◽  
Indian Pharmaceutical Industry

Through the 1984 Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act, the Indian Pharmaceutical Industry has thrived in the US market by selling generic products at competitive rates. However, the traditional and conservative model is no longer sustainable as we head past the “patent cliff”. An innovative business model characterized by the development of “super-generics”, an improved version of an original drug product which has lost patent protection, is the next logical step as it is relatively less time consuming and less expensive compared to the development of a new chemical entity, while affording higher profit margins and potentially, better patient outcomes compared to generics. This presentation will highlight the current space occupied by these super-generics, why the traditional Indian Pharmaceutical Industry should transition to become more innovative as well as the regulatory, infrastructure and personnel requirements that such a transition would entail.

The Eleventh Circuit Holds that Agreements in which Pharmaceutical Companies Pay Generic Companies Not to Compete May be Valid

2004 ◽  
Vol 32 (1) ◽  
pp. 181-184
Author(s):  
Amy Garrigues
Keyword(s):  
Pharmaceutical Companies ◽  
Court Decisions ◽  
Patent Holder ◽  
Trial Court ◽  
Court Of Appeals ◽  
The Us ◽  
Antitrust Laws ◽  
Per Se ◽  
Appeals Court ◽  
Two Sides

On September 15, 2003, the US. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit held that agreements between pharmaceutical and generic companies not to compete are not per se unlawful if these agreements do not expand the existing exclusionary right of a patent. The Valley DrugCo.v.Geneva Pharmaceuticals decision emphasizes that the nature of a patent gives the patent holder exclusive rights, and if an agreement merely confirms that exclusivity, then it is not per se unlawful. With this holding, the appeals court reversed the decision of the trial court, which held that agreements under which competitors are paid to stay out of the market are per se violations of the antitrust laws. An examination of the Valley Drugtrial and appeals court decisions sheds light on the two sides of an emerging legal debate concerning the validity of pay-not-to-compete agreements, and more broadly, on the appropriate balance between the seemingly competing interests of patent and antitrust laws.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document