{"id":67894,"date":"2020-02-03T17:30:13","date_gmt":"2020-02-03T12:00:13","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/localhost\/one\/?p=67894"},"modified":"2025-06-27T15:32:28","modified_gmt":"2025-06-27T10:02:28","slug":"indian-patent-agent-examination-patent-infringement-news","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/indian-patent-agent-examination-patent-infringement-news\/","title":{"rendered":"Indian Patent Agent Examination likely in June 2020, VMware, Apple and Broadcom found guilty of patent infringement and other patent news"},"content":{"rendered":"<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">In this week\u2019s Patent News &#8211; Indian Patent Agent Examination 2020 likely to be held in June this year; Federal Jury finds VMware guilty of patent infringement, awards $236 Million as damages to Densify; Caltech awarded $1.1 Billion in patent infringement case against Apple and Broadcom; UK Government says Brexit will have no implications on IP system during the transition period; EPO publishes grounds for rejecting two patent applications that designated a machine as an inventor.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; color: #ff6600; font-size: 12pt;\">Indian Patent News<\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\">Indian Patent Agent Examination 2020 likely to be held in June this year<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">The Indian Patent Office issued a public notice on 31<sup>st<\/sup> January 2020 indicating the Office of the Controller General of Patents, Designs and Trademarks (CGPDTM) is likely to conduct the Patent Agent Examination in June 2020.The notice also reads that further information will be made available on finalizing the schedule and certain other requirements. You may click <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"http:\/\/www.ipindia.nic.in\/writereaddata\/Portal\/Images\/pdf\/Public_Notice_PAE_2020.pdf\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">here<\/a><\/span> to access the official public notice.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; color: #ff6600;\">Patent Disputes \/ Infringements \/ Settlements \/ Licensing<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>Federal Jury finds VMware guilty of patent infringement, awards $236 Million as damages to Densify <\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">A Federal jury in Delaware has ruled in favor of Densify, a software company based in Canada, and has awarded $236 Million by way of damages in a patent infringement lawsuit involving VMware. Densify had instituted a case in April, last year, alleging that VMware\u2019s products &#8211; vRealize Operations Manager (vROps 7.0\/7.5) Predictive DRS\u00a0had infringed two of its patents, namely, US8209687 and US9654367. In addition to this, Densify had also stated that the latter had used the name \u201cDensify\u201d while referencing its own products. On Friday, last week, the jury announced its verdict before the Judge at the U.S District Court for the District of Delaware and held that VMware was guilty of patent infringement. VMware, in its statement said, \u201cWhile we appreciate and respect the judicial process, we continue to strongly believe that we do not infringe the patents asserted against us in this case, and intend to vigorously pursue all legal remedies that are available to us to prove that we are not liable here.\u201d<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>Caltech awarded $1.1 Billion in patent infringement case against Apple and Broadcom <\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">California Institute of Technology (Caltech) has been awarded $1.1 Billion in a patent infringement case against Apple and Broadcom. The University, in 2016 had instituted a suit for patent infringement against the two tech giants in the Federal Court in Los Angeles, U.S.A. In its lawsuit, Caltech had alleged that the tech giants had infringed four of the University\u2019s patents relating to Wi-Fi data transmission. Four years later, a jury has found the companies guilty of patent infringement.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">The jury has awarded Caltech a sum of $1.1 Billion where Apple is bound to pay $837.8 Million and Broadcom is liable to pay $270.2 Million, as damages. According to reports<em>, <\/em>Apple has confirmed that the company will file an Appeal.<\/span><\/p>\n<h2 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; color: #ff6600; font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>International Patent News<\/strong><\/span><\/h2>\n<h3 style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>UK Government says Brexit will have no implications on IP system during the transition period<\/strong><\/span><\/h3>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">Following the ratification of the Withdrawal Agreement by the EU and U.K, EU law will continue to operate in the UK until 31<sup>st <\/sup>of December 2020. The Intellectual Property (IP) system will continue as it is during the transition period, i.e., 1<sup>st<\/sup> February 2020 to 31<sup>st<\/sup> December 2020. The official website of the U.K Government also confirms that no disruptions will be caused to IPO services. At the end of the transition period, the IPO will convert almost 1.4 million EU trademarks and 700,000 EU designs to comparable UK rights, and these will come into effect from 1<sup>st<\/sup>of January 2021.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\"><u>Brief implications of Brexit on Patents &amp; Designs have been provided below for our readers\u2019 quick reference:<\/u><\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\">Registered Community Designs (RCD)<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">The UK will remain part of the EU registered community design system throughout the transition period. Comparable UK designs will be created at the end of the transition period under the terms of the Withdrawal Agreement.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">Businesses, organizations or individuals that have applications for an\u00a0RCD\u00a0which are ongoing at the end of the transition period will have a period of nine months from the end of the transition period to apply in the UK for the same protections.<\/span><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\">Unregistered designs<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">Unregistered community designs arising before the end of the transition period will continue to be protected in the UK for the remainder of their three-year term.Designs disclosed in the UK after the end of the transition period may be protected in the UK through the supplementary unregistered design<\/span><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\">International registrations designating the European Union<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">International registrations for trademarks and designs protected via the Madrid and Hague systems and those which designate the European Union before the end of the transition period will continue to extend to the UK after 31 December 2020.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\">Rights of Representation<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">UK legal representatives will continue to have the right to represent clients before the EU Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO), in cases that are ongoing at the end of the transition period.<\/span><\/p>\n<ul style=\"text-align: justify;\">\n<li><span style=\"font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif;\">Patents<\/span><\/strong><\/span><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">An applicant may apply for European patent through the U.K Patent office or direct to the European Patent Office (EPO) to protect the patent in more than 30 countries in Europe, using the (non-EU) European Patent Convention (EPC). As the\u00a0EPO\u00a0is not an EU agency, leaving the EU does not affect the current European patent system. Existing European patents covering the UK also remain unaffected.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">You may click <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.gov.uk\/government\/news\/intellectual-property-and-the-transition-period\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">here<\/a><\/span> to access the official post on the Govt. U.K website.<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><strong>EPO publishes grounds for rejecting two patent applications that designated a machine as an inventor<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">In the month of December, last year, the EPO refused two European Patent Applications numbered EP 18275162 and EP 18275174 which designated a machine as an Inventor. The applications named a machine called \u201cDABUS\u201d as the Inventor and described it as \u2013 \u201ca type of connectionist artificial intelligence.\u201d The applicant stated that they acquired patent rights from the inventor by being its \u201csuccessor in title.\u201d After considering the interpretation of the legal framework of the European patent system, the EPO refused the application on the grounds that the inventor was not a natural person. The Office has emphasized on the fact that the internationally accepted standard appears to accept the term \u2018inventor\u2019 as a natural person. The Office also states that it is essential for the inventor to have a legal personality to benefit from the rights derived from the patent.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">You may click here to access the Grounds for EPO decision \u2013\u00a0<a href=\"https:\/\/register.epo.org\/application?documentId=E4B63SD62191498&amp;number=EP18275163&amp;lng=en&amp;npl=false\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\"><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\">EP 18 275 163<\/span>\u00a0<\/a>and\u00a0<span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"https:\/\/register.epo.org\/application?documentId=E4B63OBI2076498&amp;number=EP18275174&amp;lng=en&amp;npl=false\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">EP 18 275 174.<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\">Source: <span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"https:\/\/www.epo.org\/news-issues\/news\/2020\/20200128.html\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener\">https:\/\/www.epo.org\/news-issues\/news\/2020\/20200128.html<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><strong><em>Authored and compiled by Vibha Amarnath <\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><em>If you have any questions, or need any clarifications, please feel free to write to\u00a0<\/em><span style=\"color: #0000ff;\"><a style=\"color: #0000ff;\" href=\"mailto:contact@bananaip.com\">contact@bananaip.com<\/a><\/span><\/span><\/p>\n<p style=\"text-align: justify;\"><span style=\"font-family: 'book antiqua', palatino, serif; font-size: 12pt;\"><em>Disclaimer<\/em><em>: Kindly note that the news bulletin has been put together from different sources, primary and secondary, and BananaIP\u2019s reporters may not have verified all the news published in the bulletin. You may write to\u00a0contact@bananaip.com\u00a0for corrections and take down.<\/em><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>This bulletin covers the likely schedule for the Indian Patent Agent Examination 2020 and major patent infringement verdicts involving VMware, Apple, and Broadcom. It also examines the implications of Brexit on the UK IP system and recent EPO decisions on AI inventorship.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"iawp_total_views":1,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6,14],"tags":[225,10902,3304,4085,3077,10901,16,4087],"class_list":["post-67894","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-intellectual-property","category-patents","tag-apple","tag-brexit-ip","tag-broadcom","tag-caltech","tag-european-patent-office","tag-indian-patent-agent-examination","tag-patent-infringement-2","tag-vmware"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67894","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=67894"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67894\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":140631,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/67894\/revisions\/140631"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=67894"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=67894"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.bananaip.com\/intellepedia\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=67894"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}