Where do you appeal to? The Registrar of Trade Marks has successfully applied for dismissal of ADJR Act proceedings challenging decisions to revoke registrations and the acceptance of trade marks. The Registrar used her powers under section 84A to revoke the registration of 8 of FPInnovation’s trade marks. Then the Registrar used her powers under s 84C to revoke their acceptance. (The Group A trade marks.) The Registrar also used her powers under.. Read More
Mr Spagnuolo has been granted “special” leave to appeal to the Full Court from Reeves J’s dismissal of his opposition to Mantra registering Q1 for a range of accommodation, travel and holiday services. Some background Q1 is another one of those “iconic” high rise apartment buildings on the Gold Coast. Its 78 levels boast 526 residential apartments, a retail shopping plaza and a resort / conference complex. In addition to operating the resort/conference.. Read More
Apple’s application for special leave to appeal from the Full Federal Court’s decision to discharge the interlocutory injunction granted by Bennett J will be heard on Friday, 9 December 2011 in Sydney. In granting the stay on the Full Federal Court’s orders, Heydon J pointed out that the fact that 2 experienced patent judges had reached opposition conclusions, in circumstances which his Honour characterised as the appeal court not disturbing Bennett J’s findings.. Read More
The High Court has extended the stay on the Full Federal Court’s dissolution of the injunction against Samsung’s Galaxy Tab 10.1 for another 7 days.
The Full Federal Court (Dowsett, Foster and Yates JJ) has allowed Samsung’s appeal from Bennett J’s decision and discharged the interlocutory injunctions against the Galaxy Tab 10.1. On a first read, it looks like a “close run” thing. It also appears the grant of (interlocutory) injunctions for patent infringement in Australia may well be increasingly influenced in the future by the sorts of issues highlighted by the US Supreme Court in KSR v.. Read More
Lander J has upheld the Registrar’s decision to allow Bitech to register DIGITEK for “TV installation accessories including external TV antennas, none of the foregoing being set-top boxes” in class 9 in the face of Hills’ prior registration for DGTEC, DGTEK and DGTECH in respect of “Digital and electronic products including televisions, video players, DVD players, CD players, decoders and cameras” also in class 9. While the competing marks were deceptively similar, they were not.. Read More
Adrian Crooks, at IPnow, provides his summary of Besanko J’s ruling in Aspirating IP v Vision Systems  FCA 1061.
If there were any doubt about it, the Full Federal Court has confirmed that the person opposing the registration of a trade mark bears the onus of proving a successful ground of opposition on appeal to the Court. (As a side note, I think this is the new Chief Justice’s first IP decision, at least since joining this Court.) The Food Channel Pty Ltd (Channel) had applied to register TM 967804: in class.. Read More
Delnorth had successfully opposed the grant of a standard patent to Dura-post for the latter’s flexible roadside posts (Patent App. No. ) on the grounds that it lacked inventive step. Dura-post appealed to the Federal Court. Delnorth decided not to continue with its opposition on appeal. (By this time, it had already lost this one (on the innovation patent) and was in liquidation.) The Federal Court directed that the appeal be allowed and.. Read More
Lindgren J has ordered that the owners of the WILD TURKEY trade mark (which those of you who drink bourbon may be familiar with) provide security for costs before they can pursue their Federal Court application to have WILD GEESE removed from the Register of Trade Marks. Lindgren J accepted that the owners, members of the international Pernod Ricard or Davide Campari groups, would have sufficient funds to satisfy an order of costs.. Read More