Patent Term Extensions in Australia: under pressure but safe for now

Government responds to the Productivity Commission Report and the Courts find “Swiss-style” claims not sufficient for a PTE   The Australian Government, in its highly anticipated response to the Productivity Commission’s Report, recommended only a minor change to the legislation relating to patent term extensions (PTEs).  Almost simultaneously, in the equally eagerly-awaited decision of the

Is the term of your US patent critical? If so, you may want to carefully consider how the US patent is prosecuted in order to maximize Patent Term Adjustment. Here’s how…

One of the many differences between Australian patent law and US patent law is the term of a patent.  In Australia, the term of a patent runs for a fixed 20 years from the filing date.  However, an extension of up to 5 years is available for certain standard patents relating to pharmaceutical substances.  Whilst

Patent Term Extensions are here to stay … for now

Patent Term Extension (PTE) provisions in Australia have recently been the subject of an extensive review. The Government has recently announced, however, that it has no plans to release the Final Report. As previously reported (see Australia’s pharmaceutical patents under review and Australia’s pharmaceutical patents under review – submissions due by 21 January 2013) a

Patent Office decision highlights identification of applications eligible for a pharmaceutical patent term extension

The term of an Australian pharmaceutical patent may be extended if a product covered by the claims receives regulatory approval in Australia. An extension of the term of a patent can be worth literally hundreds of millions of dollars to the patentee. Consequently, this is an area of Australian patent law that is of significant

Australia’s pharmaceutical patents under review – submissions due 21 January 2013

As previously reported, the Australian Government announced a review of the patent system as it relates to pharmaceuticals to establish whether it is “effectively balancing the objectives of securing timely access to competitively priced pharmaceuticals, fostering innovation and supporting employment in research and industry” and, in particular, whether the system “is being used to extend pharmaceutical monopolies at