Reimagining best patent practice in New Zealand (again)

The notion of what constitutes “best practice” when it comes to prosecuting New Zealand patent applications over the past 4-5 years has changed almost as often as Australia has changed Prime Minister.  Over this period, we’ve found that at least one of legislation (Act and Regulations), precedent law, Patent Office throughputs, examination protocols and international/bilateral

New Zealand’s proposed second-tier “Advancement” patent yet to advance

As seasoned patent scribes, who have between us covered almost everything of significance coming out of New Zealand over the past 15 years, the manner in which a recent article resonated was somewhat unexpected.  The article didn’t cover the new Patents Act 2013, poisonous divisionals, the TPP, or even Eminem supposedly suing the NZ Government

New Zealand’s self-colliding “poisonous” divisional application – a timely reminder

New Zealand’s Patents Act 2013 took effect from 13 September 2014.  Among the many changes brought about by the new legislation was the way in which the prior art base was defined.  In combination with the fact that a New Zealand patent claim is afforded a single priority date only, this potentially gives rise to

The Patents Act 2013 creates legislative space (as distinct from impetus) for a New Zealand innovation patent

A New Zealand “innovation patent”?  Unlikely, but watch this space nonetheless.  The popularity of Australia’s innovation patents regime has been well documented.  Although it is not without its faults, has been prone to certain unintended outcomes and has recently gained some high-profile critics, the Australian innovation patents regime has arguably been relatively successful in stimulating

Another reason to file early in New Zealand – the time-restricted, self-colliding, poisonous divisional

New Zealand’s new Patents Act 2013 takes effect from 13 September 2014.  There are compelling reasons to file prior to this date to take advantage of the existing laws, and these reasons have been outlined here.  Even so, it is worth making further mention of the New Zealand legislature’s efforts to modify the provisions for