How to answer IP Infringement - Part 1 Everything after Priority Date!

s13 Patents Act pg 63
1st step in infringement question - which of the patentees exclusive rights are being exploited? MAKE A LIST OF ALL CLAIMS BEFORE AND AFTER PRIORITY DATE

s13(1) Patentee has the exclusive rights to exploit, during term of patent, to exploit the invention adn to authorise another person to exploit the invention

Exploit schedule 1 defintion

a). when invention is a product, make hire sell or otherwise dispose of the product, offer to make, sell, hire or otherwise dispose of it use or import it or keep it for the purpose of doing any of those things; OR

b). Where invention is a method or process - use the method or process or do any act metnioned in paragragh (a) in respect of a product resulting from such use

2nd Step: Is it the same as the patented one? Is it infringing or non infringing?is what they are doing within the scope of or claim? Have they changed one tiny thing? Match each claim of your clients invention against the claims listed in exam
Root Quality all the essential integers need to be taken to infringe, is it mentioned in the claims? If it is probably essential MUST LOOK AT ALL CLAIMS in PATENT if it is mentioned in the claims a lot it will be.

3rd Step: if one is similar, ask the 3 improver questions from Catnic (Lord Diploc) to check if is is the same in a pruposive consturction

  1. Does the diffence between the inventions have a material effect onthe way it works? Do they work differently? If yes no infringement. If no:
  1. Would the fact that it doesn't make a material difference to the way the invention works been obvious to a person killed in that area? (PSA) If no doesn't infringe if YES:
  1. Would the PSA (techno expert) would they have understood from the claim that strict compliance was intended?

Purposive approach is used to identify essential integers of the patentees claim. What is your client trying to do with their invention?

Selling patented product in parts: Windsurfing international, Dunlop v David Mosley

4th STEP: Check for the following exploitation issues:
Making and Using : Pinefair patented product stage in other product

Repairing product: Solar Thompson, Sirdar Rubber Co Ltd v Wallington Weston

Supply of an infringing product s117 pg 52 contributory infringemnt, Part for an infringing product : BMS v Faulding - was there information about how to do a dodgy on the patented product? T10 Slide 14 SG 7

Selling 2nd hand: National Phonograph v Menck

5th Step: Discuss Remedies pg 53 defnces pg 53 if there is no cross claim of revocation** tyring to say you don't have a patentable invention to infringe s138(3) (b) . S18 tells us what a patentable invention is.

s18 Topic 8

Is it an invention? Is it a new and useful invention? Mere use of a known thing - Rogerson v Commissioner of Patents

Newness on the face of specification Lockwood v Doric

Manner of manufacture - NRDC: 2 elements:
1.economic utility

  1. artificially created end state of affairs (can't be done naturally)T8

Novelty: 3 qustions: 1. Is the information part of the prior art base? if YES

  1. Was it made publicly available before the priority date of claim? if YES
  2. Does the publicly available disclose all the essential integers?
    GO TO NEXT Coggle.

is it overseas? within patented area