March 2025 – IP Law Watch

Last Mile Logistics Comes to the End of the Road – Dei Gratia v Commissioner of Patents [2024] FCA 1145

Mar 31 2025

In Dei Gratia Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Patents [2024] FCA 1145 (Dei Gratia), the Federal Court of Australia dismissed an appeal by Dei Gratia and confirmed the decision of the Commissioner of Patents to refuse the patent application for ‘last mile logistics’. The claimed invention purported to facilitate the delivery of goods from the last point in a distribution chain to end consumers. By selecting a preferred local outlet, customers would be able to overcome delivery issues such as the need to be at home at a specific time and the protection of perishable goods that have been left at doors in high temperatures.

Best Method Challenge Continues to Offer “a Material Advantage” – Zoetis Services LLC v Boehringer Ingelheim Animal Health USA Inc [2024] FCAFC 145

Mar 27 2025

Finding against Zoetis, the Full Federal Court held that Zoetis’ three patent applications relating to pig vaccines were invalid due to the failure to disclose the best method.

Patent Trial and Appeal Board Designates “Informative” Decision Regarding Claim Construction

Mar 20 2025

On 20 March 2025, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) designated as “Informative” the majority opinion in the Decision Denying Institution in IPR2024-00952, a decision originally entered on December 13, 2024.

Make Protecting Your UK and EU Product Packaging and Labels Your New Year’s IP Resolution. Part 2: Combatting Dupes and Copycats in the United Kingdom

Mar 17 2025

By: Arthur Artinian, Simon Casinader, and Georgina Rigg

Everybody knows that trade marks are necessary to protect a brand’s logo and name, and a lot of people know that registered designs are a powerful tool in stopping counterfeit goods, but did you know these rights can also be used to help protect against unwanted “dupes” (also known as “copycat” or “lookalike” products)? Dupes and copycats deliberately mimic a successful product, and they imitate the look and feel to unfairly benefit from the goodwill attached to the product through the “halo effect,” i.e., the impression that if it looks like the original, it must be as good.

No Copyright Protection for Birkenstock Sandals: A Significant Decision from the German Federal Court of Justice

Mar 11 2025

On 20 February 2025, the German Federal Supreme Court (BGH) delivered a landmark ruling in a case concerning the copyright protection of Birkenstock sandals. In its decision, the BGH firmly rejected the claim that Birkenstock’s sandal designs qualify for copyright as “applied art” under German copyright law. This judgment not only clarifies the scope of protection for industrial design works but also contrasts with prior rulings from regional courts in Hamburg and Cologne, highlighting the challenges of determining what constitutes “creative” or “artistic” design in functional products.

Unified Patent Court Publishes First Annual Report

Mar 10 2025

The Unified Patent Court (UPC) and the Unitary Patent, which launched on 1 June 2023, marked a historic milestone, allowing for the enforcement of patents across borders via a single court. The UPC has now issued its first Annual Report.

Federal Circuit Broadens ITC Economic Prong

Mar 06 2025

In the recent decision of Lashify, Inc. v. International Trade Commission, the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit rejected the long-standing approach concerning the interpretation of the domestic-industry requirement under Section 337 of the Tariff Act of 1930. The complainant, an American company importing eyelash extensions from international manufacturers, which alleged that certain other importers were infringing on its patents.

Archive:March 2025